It's a Charger! They'll probably make an EV Challenger too, maybe like a smaller and sportier coupe. But this is a 2025 version of the 1968 Charger, not an EV version of the Challenger
Actually it blends the 1966-67 first gen charger with the 1968-70 2nd gen Charger. 1966 through 67 Chargers used Coronet lower sheet metal and added a fast back top to it. I wish they had brought back the Coronet for the lower models and four doors and used the Charger name for the higher end and highest performance models.
@@lisam4503 I think either way, they would've accomplished that 1st/2nd gen look better if the roof line came down lower. The daytona concept he showed in the middle of the video looked way better.
I think you're trying to redesign the new Charger into something it's not meant to be. You insist on comparing it to the current Challenger, which is fair to use as an example of a modern muscle car, but the design of the new Charger itself takes much more inspiration from the Gen 2 (1968-1970) Charger. Yes, the new Charger could look better (ex: slope of hood and roofline), but by bringing it even closer to the classic design, rather than what you've done, which is better on the Challenger (the kink by the door, that really looks odd on the Charger).
I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger, his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle. So yes he did redesign it on something that it is meant to be
@@fortheloveofnoise no this is not. It’s a mixture of generations in America. 66 roofline & tail lamps, 68 body , 70 front (has a divider), and the 80s lifeback.
Welp....at least we know he doesnt read his comments (or uploads premade videos despite his comments telling him why the car is a charger, not a challenger...)
He doesn’t. Or at least doesn’t care. That’s why he keeps trying to go into an overpopulated niche of journalism rather than stick to what got him here. If he listened to his viewers more…
yeah, this is the first vid ive watched in probably half a year at this point. I miss the old vids, now it fees like both channels are doing the same thing@@michaelgakanga
I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger,his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle
@@GreatName707 I personally think the kink he gave on his redesign is too much for the Charger. On the 1970 Charger, the kink was more subtle and curved whereas, the Challenger's kink is more pronounced and angular.
@@sakbhan He spent the entire video comparing this new Charger..... to the Challenger, based on them both only have 2 doors. Only problem with that is the new Charger has a 4 door version. Just a weird video.
@@Tattletale-Delta This 2 door replaces the challenger. And the 4 door replaces the charger. Why would he compare the 2 door new charger to the old 4 door charger?????? I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger, his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle
@@GreatName707 But he didn't. He made the rear useless inside and it won't work with the 4 door. Last all he did was slap the previous model on the back of the new body
@@el_covfefe his redesign to me suppose to be the way dodge should be not looking like less dodge And on the 4 door version they can stretch it out just like the way the 4 door is now
the biggest mistake that people do when it comes to comparison is they compare it with challenger, but they don't consider that the charger is older brother and it had it own design keys
While it isnt supposed to be a challenger, it still makes sense to compare the new dodge coupe model to the old, recently discontinued dodge coupe model
@@jevmat5263 so why are you comparing it to the challenger, which is a completely unrelated design? compare it to the 1970 charger that it's based off of.
@@DodgerFloof he should have done that too but it is not wrong, unreasonable, or contradictory to my previous statement to compare dodge's upcoming coupe to its previous coupe
I'd make one additional change. I'd bring the silver body closer to the ground behind the rear tire. Compared to the front end, it looks like there's less mass behind the rear tire. Shrinking the plastic of the "diffuser" would help with that.
I always enjoy your styling tweaks! I read that both 2- and 4-door versions of this car feature a hatchback... neither has a trunk which certainly affects the roofline and overall look.
I actually like the new design on the Charger. The design reminds me of the cars designed by Pontiac, Buick and Dodge from late 1960's. However, at 60k the traditional Dodge customer will be unable to afford.
Extending the greenhouse for me and aft gives more interior space for passenger and cargo - which is what an EV ( and smaller ICE ) can do for you. I think some of the paint options will look better than others as they will make the downward curving character line more visible. That will off set the same horizontal line from hood to trunk.
Personally, I think the guys at Dodge were looking at the Nissan GTR and the newer Camaro's for inspiration when they were designing the new Charger and your redesign kinda reminds me of the Scorpion car from Fortnite
I completely agree with your opinion about the 4-door looks better than the 2-door. I'm glad you said that. I noticed that yesterday after watching your Bembli review then reviewing the MT article and pics. To me, this seems like old school Detroit industry cost-saving. Design a sedan then weld the doors together, widen the C-pillar and call it a coupe. Same car and profile. But was designed to first look good as a sedan.
Very well done on the redesign on the rear end and wheels. Your styling makes more sense in this new generation. No one really wants an EV muscle car that looks like a hatchback. Some designs need to die and stay dead, like the AMC Gremlin. Dodge just keep deep trunks to make space for luggage and power upgrades. The front end is... 🤔better without the long dtrl. Am I wrong for saying that?
I was in high school in the early 00s and people looked down on hatchbacks and made fun of my car because it died at red lights. Now EVERYONE has hatchbacks that dies at redlights. I like this.
Glad to see you doing some actual redesigns! I miss them. But I thought you said you were going to fix the weird rounded line in the front profile? That seems like the change that could be only one minor face lift away as opposed to making major changes to body proportions.
As a 73 owner I appreciate the new charger at least taking some design cues from earlier generation chargers unlike the current charger which has almost nothing in common with previous generations but in my opinion if that rear quarter window was just a little shorter and that b-pillar was pushed forward making the trunk a little longer that would be beautiful
Can you please do a redesign with the 1968 Charger as a comparison? It makes more sense as that is what they were trying to do but still failed miserably.
Hey sketch i designed a grill for the mini r50. Thumb pic . Took a mini van grill and shaved it fit the gen 1 . Inspired by the ferrari roma would look great silver or body colour.
Undaubtly, looks great your redesign. Really agressive. However, i think that the real new Challenger is a great design. We have to wait for a wide body or something.
I think styling line harks back to long sweep of '68 Charger. Starting around leading edge of front door the line runs smoothly sloping through rear guard to rear of car. That was the classic Charger signature I think 🤔 The '68 emphasis with fake air slots behind front wheel seemed to reinforce reason for the entire line.
Nah, I think the new Charger - 2 door- looks fantastic; I even like it a little better than the concept. Your redesign looks nothing at all like the concept, but rather like a slight evolution from the current Challenger.
Can you please do a re-design of the 1957 Chev BelAir? I can't figure out how to make this car look modern and was such a cool design in American automotive history!
Very nice adjustments. It’s a cool looking car as is esthetically, Nothing crazy but I’m sure the performance is what will have people excited the most.
Guys. Reguardless of what it supposed to look like. The production model is not a good design. It needed some tweaks and he tweaked it. You so focused on what he’s comparing it to that you don’t see how hideous it looks. I think he did a good job with the redesign.
Love your channel. While I agree with your technician opinions I t his one, I believe your sketch was too close to the challenger vs being a newer design in this case. 👊🏻🏁
I think a lot of the design of the 2-door Charger is due to there will soon be a 4-door Charger that will comfortably accommodate two rear seat passengers.
I would love to see a redesign of a tesla model s/3 into something more aggressive like the lambo huracan. ie lower and with the almost straight line from the hood up along the windshield. Also there should be no door handles. This could be an alternative roadster design or a more aggressive looking plaid/performance. It should still be a tesla though.
It’s a Charger, not a challenger! Take a look at the old challenger and chargers, as well as the previous, they have absolutely nothing in common when it comes to their design.
I'm pretty sure the sedan and coupe both have the exact same wheelbase. They extended the side windows a little bit on the sedan but besides that they're the same. The door edge lines being moved creates and optical illusion. But ultimately, the classic Charger and Challenger were very different designs. This design is based on the 1970 Charger, not a Challenger.
Everyone is complaining about him talking about this being charger... The guys I don't care what you say it doesn't matter if this one is designed off of the old '60s and '70s charger, it still looks like a Challenger due to the fact that the Challenger and charger from the '70s and '60s looked very.. VERY similar, ESPECIALLY TO THE AVERAGE EYE
The thing I understand least is why the 2 door has a larger front wheel gap than the rear, it has a negative rake. It's not a matter of the graphics visual weight making the wheels appear different like on the EVO X, it's literally just a physically larger wheel gap. Even weirder since the 4 door looks right, same as the concept.
I feel like the redesign you did made this look like a Camaro instead of a Charger. I still prefer the Daytona concept over the production model, but I think it still looks beautiful mostly the way it is aside from some smaller touches. Sure it’s more static, but I think they were going for a specific look that mimics the 1968 generation Charger that has a lot of flat lines that actually accentuates the length of the vehicle rather than the motion of it. Because of the lengthy greenhouse and sport-back design, it also delivers design cues that are similar to the 1965 Charger. The Daytona concept conveys a visual motion similar to an arrow or javelin and delivers more of a premium executive coupe aesthetic. I also feel like comparing it to the Challenger is more of an apples to oranges concept because if they wanted to invoke the same message that the Challenger does then they would have named it the Challenger. Overall, the production version looks more like an Enterprise rental car version of a Xenatec Maybach 57s coupe. Not bad, but misses the mark either way.
I would say the 4 door version is fine as is, except it needs the indents in the doors. That would be a proper successor to the current Charger. However yes they're calling the 2 door a Charger as well but let's face it- it's taking the place of the Challenger. Therefore to me it does make sense to compare the 2 door version with the Challenger and make it look a little more Challenger-ish. More muscular and a little less sleek.
Idk....the more I look at this new 2dr Charger, the more I don't like it. The side mirrors they went with are horrible. Looking from an angle at the back quarter panel to the front of the car, looks too much like a Camaro. When I saw the 4 door, I actually think that version looks better 🤔
Could be because it extends the visual length, also making it proportionally less tall. So that moves the proportions a bit closer to the classic skinny cars of the 60s/70s
You are wrong we are still getting a new Challenger. Dodge only made the charger both two and four door because when they initially brought it back to the market in 2004 as a 4 door everyone kept bitching and moaning calling it “not a real charger”. So dodge responded by bringing it back as a two door but still kept the 4 door option because thats the most profitable format for this car seeing how successful the last two generations were.
I hate how uneducated ppl completely disregard the CLEAR design inspirations from the original charger. Guys yes the 68-70 is the most iconic BUT dont act like thats the first one.
Speaking of eggs and chicken, I think the new Charger was designed as a 4-door first. From the side profile it looks like a typical sedan based coupe, which is why I think it doesn't look as dynamic as it could. Similar thing with MB C- & E-Class coupes compared to completely separate models SL and AMG GT.
I don't think it's supposed to be a Challenger. If you look at the Charger historically, it started as a coupe that still had a bit of a static feel with the same character line starting in the door and connecting to the trunk. And in parallel they had the Challenger, which was the true muscle car. After they paused them for a while they brought them back. The Charger became Dodge's version of the C300 while retaining the same overall vibe, and the Challenger was clearly a Challenger. Now the Challenger seems to be going away, while the Charger is sort of remembering what it used to be(which is not another Challenger)
The charger is based on the 1970's charger. It is not based on the Challenger because it is a Charger so they didn't change the charger, they using the early design and discontinued the challenger
Great video! Thank you so much. I was really wondering what happened between the auto show version and the production version. I really wanted one but not a fan of the production version now :( 4:52 . Those extra large side mirrors and the huge side rear window blackout borders, really look bad to me.... haha, ya I thought the 4 door looked better also, I just said that to my friend a few minutes ago. Wow your redesign looks so much better! I do prefer the original angle on the prototype though, vs the mustang look of your edit.
i feel like a lot of you guys that oppose comparing the challenger to the charger miss the point he's making. this new charger is a 2 door and so is the challenger so it's logical to compare the 2. even just by looking at them you can see similarities. and to those that say the new charger is a rendition of the second generation charger, sure you can say that's what dodge is going for but c'mon. they are obviously 2 completely different vehicles with barely any similarities.
Problem is you made a Challenger redesign not a Charger. For wheel size, wimpy sizes have the advantage of lower cost and better EPA fuel economy to hit fuel efficiency mandates.
I think the disappointment is due to the difference between the concept and the production car. The concept was beautiful and the production looks weak. Let's hope they update it in the next generation (if there is one after this)
I like your design but feel like it looks like a challenger. I wonder if adding better wheels and lowering the charger would make it look more like the concept. I really feel like the main issue with it are the wheels.
First issue I see is you keep comparing it to the Challenger! It's a Charger not a Challenger! Really the Challenger in its day was never really a Muscle Car! It was a pony car and based on the E body while the Charger was a B body. Only in modern times were they built on the same platform.. Only in modern times was the Charger ever a four door. The Charger was the highest end Muscle car when fully loaded. Second issue while its still meant to represent a muscle car it's primary function is as an EV. Dodge is trying to strike a happy balance between battery range and muscle car looks and performance. So drag co-efficient becomes very important. Even something seemingly so minor as changing the type of rims can negatively impact drag co-efficient. Range anxiety is a big complaint about EV's. I almost think its stupid to nit pick on battery range for a vehicle like a Charger while totally ignoring the poor MPG-s of a hellcat or demon powered one. Especially when you know the all wheel drive EV powered one will blow the doors off a comparably priced Ice powered one. I think if you could bring your idea of what Dodge should have done to life it would lose in the wind tunnel to what Dodge did. Also you can bet with them going to offer a four door version in both EV and Ice configurations they will be looking to sell them to law enforcement as police cars. Again the Dodge version outperforms your version for that purpose. .
(This comment is another comment I made in the replies of another, but thought it should be one on it's own.) This comment will mainly talk about why him comparing the new charger to the challenger isn't exactly the right maneuver. The rear window shaping is way too sudden compared to the old chargers in the late 60s to 1970. It makes it look more like the 1970 or 1971 Challenger. Which doesn't make sense as this is supposed to be the new Charger I personally think he should have used references from the late 60s / early 70 chargers for references so that way it would make more sense.
I’m just gonna repost my comment form the previous video. With all due respect… You’re telling me that you’re about to spend the entirety of this video fully comparing The Dodge CHARGER’s Successor to The current Challenger? Two DIFFERENT cars… That, DO NOT Look similar and then elaborate on why they DO NOT look similar? How much time was put into this video? If u want to do it for fun that’s cool i guess, But WHY? Specifically referring to the challenger as “The old one” … bruh this isn’t “the new one” it’s literally a different car. Why there’s no mention of any other PREVIOUS Charger on the video is WILD. The 60’s charger basically DEFINED what we refer to as “classic muscle proportions “ to this day. That coke bottle shape has always been it’s main factor and you’re comparing it to the Chrysler Brick ? I’m Lost… Again no disrespect but this is video is an ENTIRE L .
You are a brilliant designer but, in this case, I disagree with your assessment. The old challenger looks awful compared to this new one. I do understand that the height of the hood on center line is not optimal....but that is basically the only thing to quibble with. The rest is a massive aesthetic improvement. All that being said, I think your videos are excellent. This critique should be taken very, very lightly. You do excellent work for sure.
I mean, yes it looks a little soft, but I don't get why we're still comparing the Charger to the Challenger. Why not compare it to the 60's, 70's Charger, since that looks more like what they were going for.?
I currently own a 2014 Camaro. This redesign for the Charger definitely gets it closer to a traditional family car. It tones down some of the best muscle car features. Not sold of the headlights either or lack of.
*The windows are massive, The body line is low. The wheel well are tiny. Dodge really fucked their design up. Looks how the front wheels are pushed backwards in the wheel well.*
your tweaks don't look like a Charger... I would move the greenhouse back, raise the rear deck, but the fast back should actually flow further over the trunk.... also get rid of the curve over the front wheels...
I really wanted to like this thing but something's really off and I can't quite put my finger on it. Wheel to body relationship is awkward, front wheel not centered in wheel arch. Hoping it looks better in person but I'm afraid it might flop. Agree, the sedan looks way better.
It's a Charger! They'll probably make an EV Challenger too, maybe like a smaller and sportier coupe. But this is a 2025 version of the 1968 Charger, not an EV version of the Challenger
Actually it blends the 1966-67 first gen charger with the 1968-70 2nd gen Charger. 1966 through 67 Chargers used Coronet lower sheet metal and added a fast back top to it. I wish they had brought back the Coronet for the lower models and four doors and used the Charger name for the higher end and highest performance models.
Nah let the challenger stay dead
@@lisam4503 I think either way, they would've accomplished that 1st/2nd gen look better if the roof line came down lower. The daytona concept he showed in the middle of the video looked way better.
I think you're trying to redesign the new Charger into something it's not meant to be. You insist on comparing it to the current Challenger, which is fair to use as an example of a modern muscle car, but the design of the new Charger itself takes much more inspiration from the Gen 2 (1968-1970) Charger.
Yes, the new Charger could look better (ex: slope of hood and roofline), but by bringing it even closer to the classic design, rather than what you've done, which is better on the Challenger (the kink by the door, that really looks odd on the Charger).
I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger, his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle. So yes he did redesign it on something that it is meant to be
@@GreatName707Nop… absolutely not !
Def Not!!
@@GreatName707
I actually believe it is a modern take on the Australian Valiant Charger but they wont admit that to us.
@@fortheloveofnoise no this is not. It’s a mixture of generations in America. 66 roofline & tail lamps, 68 body , 70 front (has a divider), and the 80s lifeback.
Welp....at least we know he doesnt read his comments (or uploads premade videos despite his comments telling him why the car is a charger, not a challenger...)
i think they are premade since the sketches appear insta a few days before the video
He doesn’t. Or at least doesn’t care. That’s why he keeps trying to go into an overpopulated niche of journalism rather than stick to what got him here. If he listened to his viewers more…
yeah, this is the first vid ive watched in probably half a year at this point. I miss the old vids, now it fees like both channels are doing the same thing@@michaelgakanga
I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger,his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle
@@GreatName707 I personally think the kink he gave on his redesign is too much for the Charger. On the 1970 Charger, the kink was more subtle and curved whereas, the Challenger's kink is more pronounced and angular.
I hope you are reading the comments on your last video
I hope so too.
what happened
@@sakbhan He spent the entire video comparing this new Charger..... to the Challenger, based on them both only have 2 doors. Only problem with that is the new Charger has a 4 door version. Just a weird video.
@@Tattletale-Delta This 2 door replaces the challenger. And the 4 door replaces the charger. Why would he compare the 2 door new charger to the old 4 door charger??????
I just compared the 1970 charger to the new 2 door charger, his redesign made it look more like the old charger, the old one even had a little challenger muscle
@@Tattletale-Delta The new 2-door Charger is also meant to be a modernization of the 1970 Dodge Charger, which was also a 2-door.
The new Dodge charger isn't supposed to look like a challenger, the design is perfect already
No it's not. It's ugly as fuck.
still a weak design, his redesign made it so much stronger
@@GreatName707 But he didn't. He made the rear useless inside and it won't work with the 4 door. Last all he did was slap the previous model on the back of the new body
far from perfect.
@@el_covfefe his redesign to me suppose to be the way dodge should be not looking like less dodge
And on the 4 door version they can stretch it out just like the way the 4 door is now
It's charger not challenger.. It has it's own design.. It not suppose to be a challenger.
the biggest mistake that people do when it comes to comparison is they compare it with challenger, but they don't consider that the charger is older brother and it had it own design keys
the body lines are supposed to be reminiscent of a 2nd gen charger (1968-70).
his redesign made it look more like the old charger, i compared them
@@GreatName707 his redesign makes it look more like the outgoing challenger.
It’s literally just a retro design of the 1966 Dodge Charger from the interior to the exterior everybody has been getting this wrong lol
While it isnt supposed to be a challenger, it still makes sense to compare the new dodge coupe model to the old, recently discontinued dodge coupe model
Although the new Charger coupe model is identical in proportions to the 4 door version.
why? even if it is a replacement for the challenger, why does that mean it can't have it's own design?
@@DodgerFloof I didn't say it can't have it's own design, neither did thesketchmonkey
@@jevmat5263 so why are you comparing it to the challenger, which is a completely unrelated design? compare it to the 1970 charger that it's based off of.
@@DodgerFloof he should have done that too but it is not wrong, unreasonable, or contradictory to my previous statement to compare dodge's upcoming coupe to its previous coupe
Can you please do a full video of you redesigning the whole car😁
Adding in the door scallops would have been the icing on the cake imo
I'd make one additional change.
I'd bring the silver body closer to the ground behind the rear tire.
Compared to the front end, it looks like there's less mass behind the rear tire. Shrinking the plastic of the "diffuser" would help with that.
its a fast back design that dates back to the mid 1960s to the mid 1970s , dodge and ford nascar style
I too have a 1/24 scale model of the GMC Vandora A-Team van 😊
I always enjoy your styling tweaks! I read that both 2- and 4-door versions of this car feature a hatchback... neither has a trunk which certainly affects the roofline and overall look.
The side profile you just made it look like a Challenger.. so
I do love the concept wheels, I wish theyd maybe sell those as a performance part
Crazy how much the roof and window line looks like the R35
I actually like the new design on the Charger. The design reminds me of the cars designed by Pontiac, Buick and Dodge from late 1960's. However, at 60k the traditional Dodge customer will be unable to afford.
Extending the greenhouse for me and aft gives more interior space for passenger and cargo - which is what an EV ( and smaller ICE ) can do for you. I think some of the paint options will look better than others as they will make the downward curving character line more visible. That will off set the same horizontal line from hood to trunk.
The concept was gorgeous. it was possible to put this in production!
Personally, I think the guys at Dodge were looking at the Nissan GTR and the newer Camaro's for inspiration when they were designing the new Charger and your redesign kinda reminds me of the Scorpion car from Fortnite
I completely agree with your opinion about the 4-door looks better than the 2-door. I'm glad you said that. I noticed that yesterday after watching your Bembli review then reviewing the MT article and pics. To me, this seems like old school Detroit industry cost-saving. Design a sedan then weld the doors together, widen the C-pillar and call it a coupe. Same car and profile. But was designed to first look good as a sedan.
By the way, looking at side views of the current Charger sedan and that hood and trunk line are virtually same level too.
Very well done on the redesign on the rear end and wheels. Your styling makes more sense in this new generation. No one really wants an EV muscle car that looks like a hatchback. Some designs need to die and stay dead, like the AMC Gremlin. Dodge just keep deep trunks to make space for luggage and power upgrades. The front end is... 🤔better without the long dtrl. Am I wrong for saying that?
I was in high school in the early 00s and people looked down on hatchbacks and made fun of my car because it died at red lights. Now EVERYONE has hatchbacks that dies at redlights. I like this.
Нереально рад что вернулся старый формат видео, очень сильно нуждался в этом, спасибо тебе что вернулся, как и всегда кайфую с этих роликов
Glad to see you doing some actual redesigns! I miss them. But I thought you said you were going to fix the weird rounded line in the front profile? That seems like the change that could be only one minor face lift away as opposed to making major changes to body proportions.
Glad to see the channel turning around. Everything looks good:3
As a 73 owner I appreciate the new charger at least taking some design cues from earlier generation chargers unlike the current charger which has almost nothing in common with previous generations but in my opinion if that rear quarter window was just a little shorter and that b-pillar was pushed forward making the trunk a little longer that would be beautiful
My main complaint of the new Charger, aside from the lack of a V8, is the size and weight.
The thing weighs more than an extended length Escalade.
like a true American land yacht
because you're comparing an ev to an ice car lmao
@@DodgerFloof An EV car to a full size ICE suv, yes. The EV car is heavier.
@@lj5190 so what? evs are heavy, who cares?
@@DodgerFloof From a performance standpoint, it means worse handling. From an efficiency standpoint, it means less efficiency.
Can you please do a redesign with the 1968 Charger as a comparison? It makes more sense as that is what they were trying to do but still failed miserably.
Hey sketch i designed a grill for the mini r50. Thumb pic . Took a mini van grill and shaved it fit the gen 1 . Inspired by the ferrari roma would look great silver or body colour.
Mitigating the “round headlight” treatment from the current Challenger front end for the Sixpack model would be distinctive and attractive.
Undaubtly, looks great your redesign. Really agressive.
However, i think that the real new Challenger is a great design. We have to wait for a wide body or something.
I think styling line harks back to long sweep of '68 Charger. Starting around leading edge of front door the line runs smoothly sloping through rear guard to rear of car. That was the classic Charger signature I think 🤔
The '68 emphasis with fake air slots behind front wheel seemed to reinforce reason for the entire line.
The Charger literally has a angled line to the front, why do you say that it looks static?
You made it so much better!😮
Nah, I think the new Charger - 2 door- looks fantastic; I even like it a little better than the concept. Your redesign looks nothing at all like the concept, but rather like a slight evolution from the current Challenger.
In your design, I would have lowered the hood a little. But I do agree the new Charger looks great.
Wow, the concept looks way better...
Can you please do a re-design of the 1957 Chev BelAir? I can't figure out how to make this car look modern and was such a cool design in American automotive history!
I think the concept looks the best
Very nice adjustments. It’s a cool looking car as is esthetically, Nothing crazy but I’m sure the performance is what will have people excited the most.
Same with the M3/M4 definitely prefer the 4door especially from the side.
There needs to be a Concept Car Bodykit for this.
It's really a good redesign
It's perfect for this kind of syling
Guys. Reguardless of what it supposed to look like. The production model is not a good design. It needed some tweaks and he tweaked it. You so focused on what he’s comparing it to that you don’t see how hideous it looks. I think he did a good job with the redesign.
Do more! Alter the front and rear as well. Very interested in seeing how you would change those.
Love your channel. While I agree with your technician opinions I t his one, I believe your sketch was too close to the challenger vs being a newer design in this case. 👊🏻🏁
Couldn't agree with you more on your takes on the new Charger design.
I think a lot of the design of the 2-door Charger is due to there will soon be a 4-door Charger that will comfortably accommodate two rear seat passengers.
I would love to see a redesign of a tesla model s/3 into something more aggressive like the lambo huracan. ie lower and with the almost straight line from the hood up along the windshield. Also there should be no door handles. This could be an alternative roadster design or a more aggressive looking plaid/performance. It should still be a tesla though.
It’s a Charger, not a challenger! Take a look at the old challenger and chargers, as well as the previous, they have absolutely nothing in common when it comes to their design.
Perhaps they are trying to save on parts and used front panels and doors form the 4door on the 2 door version, creating vierdness?
You really fixed it so easily
Im impressed with the look of this car.
I wouldn't do the electric version ever!
The concept looks like a Muscle car, Instead the production version looks like a toy
just love yr redesigning content
I'm pretty sure the sedan and coupe both have the exact same wheelbase. They extended the side windows a little bit on the sedan but besides that they're the same. The door edge lines being moved creates and optical illusion. But ultimately, the classic Charger and Challenger were very different designs. This design is based on the 1970 Charger, not a Challenger.
คุณออกแบบรถได้ดี ดูลงตัวและสวยขึ้น
Thanks for the video…but I want more a side view of the 1968 Dodge Charger R/T compared to the new Dodge Charger !
The four door does look better imo. It makes it look more like the last generation charger
Everyone is complaining about him talking about this being charger... The guys I don't care what you say it doesn't matter if this one is designed off of the old '60s and '70s charger, it still looks like a Challenger due to the fact that the Challenger and charger from the '70s and '60s looked very.. VERY similar, ESPECIALLY TO THE AVERAGE EYE
The charger 4 door is obviously wayyy bigger than the current it’s like it’s about to replace the Quattroporte
The thing I understand least is why the 2 door has a larger front wheel gap than the rear, it has a negative rake. It's not a matter of the graphics visual weight making the wheels appear different like on the EVO X, it's literally just a physically larger wheel gap. Even weirder since the 4 door looks right, same as the concept.
Looking rather gtr from that side profile, and im all for it ❤. Awd i6 twin turbo is a huge W for us non murricans.
I feel like the redesign you did made this look like a Camaro instead of a Charger. I still prefer the Daytona concept over the production model, but I think it still looks beautiful mostly the way it is aside from some smaller touches. Sure it’s more static, but I think they were going for a specific look that mimics the 1968 generation Charger that has a lot of flat lines that actually accentuates the length of the vehicle rather than the motion of it. Because of the lengthy greenhouse and sport-back design, it also delivers design cues that are similar to the 1965 Charger. The Daytona concept conveys a visual motion similar to an arrow or javelin and delivers more of a premium executive coupe aesthetic. I also feel like comparing it to the Challenger is more of an apples to oranges concept because if they wanted to invoke the same message that the Challenger does then they would have named it the Challenger. Overall, the production version looks more like an Enterprise rental car version of a Xenatec Maybach 57s coupe. Not bad, but misses the mark either way.
I would say the 4 door version is fine as is, except it needs the indents in the doors. That would be a proper successor to the current Charger. However yes they're calling the 2 door a Charger as well but let's face it- it's taking the place of the Challenger. Therefore to me it does make sense to compare the 2 door version with the Challenger and make it look a little more Challenger-ish. More muscular and a little less sleek.
It only lacks the Pininfarina badge as can be seen on its brothers the Peugeot 504 Coupe and Fiat 130.
100% agree
it's an improvement... but you just made it look like a Challenger.
Thank you for pronouncing Coupé properly with the accent where it belongs. 1:03
Idk....the more I look at this new 2dr Charger, the more I don't like it. The side mirrors they went with are horrible. Looking from an angle at the back quarter panel to the front of the car, looks too much like a Camaro. When I saw the 4 door, I actually think that version looks better 🤔
I also think the 4 door looks better. Has more similar proportions to the concept.
Could be because it extends the visual length, also making it proportionally less tall. So that moves the proportions a bit closer to the classic skinny cars of the 60s/70s
You are wrong we are still getting a new Challenger. Dodge only made the charger both two and four door because when they initially brought it back to the market in 2004 as a 4 door everyone kept bitching and moaning calling it “not a real charger”. So dodge responded by bringing it back as a two door but still kept the 4 door option because thats the most profitable format for this car seeing how successful the last two generations were.
I hate how uneducated ppl completely disregard the CLEAR design inspirations from the original charger. Guys yes the 68-70 is the most iconic BUT dont act like thats the first one.
Speaking of eggs and chicken, I think the new Charger was designed as a 4-door first. From the side profile it looks like a typical sedan based coupe, which is why I think it doesn't look as dynamic as it could. Similar thing with MB C- & E-Class coupes compared to completely separate models SL and AMG GT.
I don't think it's supposed to be a Challenger. If you look at the Charger historically, it started as a coupe that still had a bit of a static feel with the same character line starting in the door and connecting to the trunk. And in parallel they had the Challenger, which was the true muscle car. After they paused them for a while they brought them back. The Charger became Dodge's version of the C300 while retaining the same overall vibe, and the Challenger was clearly a Challenger. Now the Challenger seems to be going away, while the Charger is sort of remembering what it used to be(which is not another Challenger)
May aswell compare the 69 charger and 71 challenger, apples and oranges.
The charger is based on the 1970's charger. It is not based on the Challenger because it is a Charger so they didn't change the charger, they using the early design and discontinued the challenger
Great video! Thank you so much. I was really wondering what happened between the auto show version and the production version. I really wanted one but not a fan of the production version now :( 4:52 . Those extra large side mirrors and the huge side rear window blackout borders, really look bad to me.... haha, ya I thought the 4 door looked better also, I just said that to my friend a few minutes ago. Wow your redesign looks so much better! I do prefer the original angle on the prototype though, vs the mustang look of your edit.
i feel like a lot of you guys that oppose comparing the challenger to the charger miss the point he's making. this new charger is a 2 door and so is the challenger so it's logical to compare the 2. even just by looking at them you can see similarities. and to those that say the new charger is a rendition of the second generation charger, sure you can say that's what dodge is going for but c'mon. they are obviously 2 completely different vehicles with barely any similarities.
Designed as a 4-door car not a 2-door... for me, the design of the BMW 6 series is the only design that worked as a 2-door and 4-door coupe.
Problem is you made a Challenger redesign not a Charger. For wheel size, wimpy sizes have the advantage of lower cost and better EPA fuel economy to hit fuel efficiency mandates.
I think the original design is better. It's closer to the design of the '79 charger.
So what you did was make it a refresh with a new front end instead of the clean sheet design it is.
I think the disappointment is due to the difference between the concept and the production car. The concept was beautiful and the production looks weak.
Let's hope they update it in the next generation (if there is one after this)
I like your design but feel like it looks like a challenger. I wonder if adding better wheels and lowering the charger would make it look more like the concept. I really feel like the main issue with it are the wheels.
First issue I see is you keep comparing it to the Challenger! It's a Charger not a Challenger! Really the Challenger in its day was never really a Muscle Car! It was a pony car and based on the E body while the Charger was a B body. Only in modern times were they built on the same platform.. Only in modern times was the Charger ever a four door. The Charger was the highest end Muscle car when fully loaded. Second issue while its still meant to represent a muscle car it's primary function is as an EV. Dodge is trying to strike a happy balance between battery range and muscle car looks and performance.
So drag co-efficient becomes very important. Even something seemingly so minor as changing the type of rims can negatively impact drag co-efficient. Range anxiety is a big complaint about EV's. I almost think its stupid to nit pick on battery range for a vehicle like a Charger while totally ignoring the poor MPG-s of a hellcat or demon powered one. Especially when you know the all wheel drive EV powered one will blow the doors off a comparably priced Ice powered one.
I think if you could bring your idea of what Dodge should have done to life it would lose in the wind tunnel to what Dodge did. Also you can bet with them going to offer a four door version in both EV and Ice configurations they will be looking to sell them to law enforcement as police cars. Again the Dodge version outperforms your version for that purpose.
.
I really miss round headlights.
charger always had hidden headlights, you probably miss challenger.
(This comment is another comment I made in the replies of another, but thought it should be one on it's own.)
This comment will mainly talk about why him comparing the new charger to the challenger isn't exactly the right maneuver.
The rear window shaping is way too sudden compared to the old chargers in the late 60s to 1970.
It makes it look more like the 1970 or 1971 Challenger. Which doesn't make sense as this is supposed to be the new Charger
I personally think he should have used references from the late 60s / early 70 chargers for references so that way it would make more sense.
I’m just gonna repost my comment form the previous video.
With all due respect…
You’re telling me that you’re about to spend the entirety of this video fully comparing The Dodge CHARGER’s Successor to The current Challenger?
Two DIFFERENT cars…
That, DO NOT Look similar and then elaborate on why they DO NOT look similar?
How much time was put into this video? If u want to do it for fun that’s cool i guess, But WHY?
Specifically referring to the challenger as “The old one” …
bruh this isn’t “the new one” it’s literally a different car.
Why there’s no mention of any other PREVIOUS Charger on the video is WILD.
The 60’s charger basically DEFINED what we refer to as “classic muscle proportions “ to this day. That coke bottle shape has always been it’s main factor and you’re comparing it to the Chrysler Brick ? I’m Lost…
Again no disrespect but this is video is an ENTIRE L .
Subjective: 2 door looks better to me.
You are a brilliant designer but, in this case, I disagree with your assessment. The old challenger looks awful compared to this new one. I do understand that the height of the hood on center line is not optimal....but that is basically the only thing to quibble with. The rest is a massive aesthetic improvement. All that being said, I think your videos are excellent. This critique should be taken very, very lightly. You do excellent work for sure.
I think the most beautiful car design is in 2010 to 2017. After that all cars looks wierd
I mean, yes it looks a little soft, but I don't get why we're still comparing the Charger to the Challenger. Why not compare it to the 60's, 70's Charger, since that looks more like what they were going for.?
Because for 20 years they have shared the same chassis
Unless it’s got a V-8 I really don’t care what it looks like
I currently own a 2014 Camaro. This redesign for the Charger definitely gets it closer to a traditional family car. It tones down some of the best muscle car features. Not sold of the headlights either or lack of.
It's a charger not a challenger
@@DodgerFloof Do you like the new design? Back to two doors is finally good to see. How long before someone swaps in a V-8?
@@kevinl3235 probably never, at least not the huge hemis. looks like a small engine bay just big enough for the i6.
You're probably right but there's always that "one guy" lol.
Youre right, the concept is soo much nicer. The production model is a bit bland.
*The windows are massive, The body line is low. The wheel well are tiny. Dodge really fucked their design up. Looks how the front wheels are pushed backwards in the wheel well.*
your tweaks don't look like a Charger... I would move the greenhouse back, raise the rear deck, but the fast back should actually flow further over the trunk.... also get rid of the curve over the front wheels...
u nailed it
I really wanted to like this thing but something's really off and I can't quite put my finger on it. Wheel to body relationship is awkward, front wheel not centered in wheel arch. Hoping it looks better in person but I'm afraid it might flop. Agree, the sedan looks way better.
just look at the 69 charger and you see where the lines came from