I worked for Dodge and drove the new Challengers. They are a cool and well rounded car. Too heavy but a blast to drive, great road trip car. I've been for a ride in that Hotchkis Challenger 3 times at Mopars at the Strip in Vegas and Good Guys at Delmar. That engine is pretty stock regardless of how it sounds but that car is a blast. give it more power and it wouldn't matter what you did to the later car.
"the thing about driving this is that it's from 1970, but it handles even better than a new Challenger!" Yeah maybe that's cause it's got heavy fucking handling, transmission and engine mods like the ones you listed literally 30 seconds ago. Get a bone stock '70 and then compare the two. Better yet, Heavily mod a 2010 and then compare them. This video reeks of baby-boomer nostalgia and bias.
+scr34m1ng Agreed! These old muscle cars are definitely cool, but they're nothing compared to modern muscle unless highly modified like the Challenger in the video.
I work in a garage and I opened a car door to read the door placard for some info and right under the VIN it also read. "Vehicle Made In Mexico". It was on a new Nitro or Caliber if I recall correctly. It hurts my soul to see that!
But the plus to the Hotchkis.suspension mods, is it can be put back to stock if you want to. Plus since the TA was Dodge's road going Trans Am racer, it makes sense to use it as a platform to display a muscle car that can handle.
I just watched a vintage test track of the 1971 Challenger 383 4-speed, The car swung around curves like a sailing schooner on a broad reach, it took 211' to stop from 60. 0-70 in 8 seconds. This 1970 benefits from technology that did not exist in 1970. Not trashing it, love the old muscle cars, but test them with what they came with including the skinny crappy tires they rolled on in the day.
The new Challenger 6.4 L V-8 Tremec w 392 ci 470 hp / 470 tq does 0-60 in 4.3 sec. now that's a big difference. Without his work on suspension the 1970 is all over the road. Still love them both.
This isnt a true comparison test. You're taking a modified car and putting it against a stock off the assembly line car. That's like me saying "hey let's compare my Jetta to a Space X Rocket". Its literally apples and oranges. Bring us a stock 70 Challenger and see how it handles against a stock 10' Challenger.
ernest Apellido What are you trying to say? The 70 Challenger has a 383 and the only thing that I saw that was changed was the steering wheel, rims and interior.
M y friend. It isnt. Its a special built version that you can actually buy today. It has special suspension. Exhaust. Trans mods plus few other sweet gadgets.
I think he is responding more to the old challengers feel sound and so on ? than the modifications. It's true it makes you what to giggle when you drive older one. I would love to have seen his response to a big block. I would say the comparison is like digital to analog something is lost in the conversion.
Doesn't surprise me. Because, The new just one looks pretty big and it's more than likely heavier. Has all that safety and electronic stuff built in. It may be an SRT but SRT is more for speed. Imagine an SRT in that 1970 challenger? That would be blazing fast. I would love to see that.
Well I could honestly see why they didn't compare the new one to a typical stock 1970 challenger. The new one would probably beat 1970 stock one easily...
As much as I love a classic Challenger (I'd take one over a new Challenger) this is not a fair comparison. The 70 Challenger T/A did great in it's day but the one in the video has been highly modified. Do the same type of mods on the new Challenger and the outcome would be quite different I'd bet.
You can believe whatever you want but that doesn't change the fact that there's a 1970 Challenger 440 "six-pack" torn apart in our garage. Car restoration is what I do for a living...
What a stupid test. This is a highly modified 1970 Challenger vs a bone stock 2010 Challenger SRT8. How about we take off ALL of the aftermarket modifications from the 1970 Challenger and then get a TRUE comparison. It would be no contest. The ONLY way for these older muscle cars to stand a chance against modern muscle is to modify them. Pathetic.
+Rick W tbh I can see where they got that idea. The top dogs of the 60s were some of the fastest cars on the street up until the mid 90s when technology really started to increase horsepower. Fastest cars for 3 decades? I can see why they still might have that thought now.
It really isn't a stupid test, people have never known stock muscle cars too handle well. What this really shows is the capabilities and advancements made in the automotive aftermarket. Truth is that if anything the new challenger has a modern fuel injected roller cammed engine with a modern 6spd stick. Where the early challenger is a mostly stock drivetrain. Not to mention the 5.2l versus the 6.4l of the srt8.
@Rick W...people don't get that! add the mods on the SRT8 and you'll see the difference...a buddy just waxed a 2016 mustang gt with his mod'ded but street legal '67 mustang... engine power trans, axle and WEIGHT all make a difference...
You know a single Movie is what kicked off the whole Modern Muscle Car craze. It was the movie Gone in 60 Seconds. The Shelby GT 500 in that movie just looked amazing and futuristic for a car made in 1967. The movie came out in 2000. The Mustang, and Camero at the time had a 1990s Body Style. More rounder,and curvea not sharp boxy design like the 1960s Muscle Cars. I believe the Popularity of that movie and Car was the reason Auto Companies desided to produce a Modern Muscle Car. Because the Ford Mustang was the first Modern Car with the Muscle Car Body, I believe the Camero or Challenger was the next. Then the Movie Transformers came out and had the new Camero and blew people away. Oh and can't forget Fast and the Furious 1. Doms Muscle Car at the End. 2001
It bugs me that y'all did not black out behind the grill of the 70, oh well though awesome car nonetheless... I've got the front and rear sway bars installed on mine, now I just need to save up $ for the upper a arms, tie rods and mono-tube shocks. I think it will make a big difference even on rallye wheels and BFG radial tires
@aikenforjeff Edmunds did a side by side comparison on a 2008 Challenger vs a 1970 "Vanishing Point" Challenger. The only notable difference was the 440 magnum was bored out and was running a 950 carb. Otherwise pretty much a stock replica using the technology that was applicable to that time frame. Check out the vid and then decide which of the two you would prefer.
I have a 70 and seam to have a 72 as well. I also drive Shelby Dodges. I tell my Mopar friends that a Muscle ends up where the Shelby Dodge starts out. I add the same tires to the 86 GLHS and it keeps up in a straight line and obliterates it in every handling and breaking test. Go 3 bar and now much faster in a straight line. Love my Challenger too, going to add the Chassis stiffening to it soon. But I don't drive it because it handles great, or a new one for that matter...
I hate all the people who says this is a dumb comparison just because both cars aren't stock. Come on, the modified Challenger exists! That means it's okay to compare it to something! Just because they're putting two cars next to each other, that doesn't mean they're trying to say that the old engineers were better. They're saying that someone has made an old Challenger that works better than the new one. The SRT8 is JUST a benchmark to DEMONSTRATE the virtues of the modified Challenger.
I'd rather have the old school original suspension, it made the car bounce when you stepped on the gas, and made the car screetch more around turns which sounded and looked cooler, a modern suspension is too smooth and rely's on technology/electronics. You just have to learn how to handle the car. The old school suspension is a lot more fun, the modern suspension just absorbs to much of that fun, you don't feel the torque or power because the modern suspension absorbs it.
yeaaa this isnt misleading at all.. 1) not a 1970 challenger.. its been modded with modern parts 2) the 2010 challenger is tuned, and the "1970" challenger is tuned/modded 3) its like no one checked this before actually posting... dumb.
To all of the people that have gotten their panties in a bunch about this comparison. First of all there are plenty of comparison videos out there that show new cars beating old cars as well they should be with the advancement of technology. Second the point of this video is to show that the new cars are better in some ways but the old school cars definitely have their place too and can be a lot of fun to drive and with a few modifications can be pretty much on par with the new cars. Most of the children bashing the old cars here have probably never even had the privilege of sitting in an old car much less having driven one. I am as hard core Mopar as they come I have several old cars in my collection and I have driven new Mopars too and they both have thier good points. Its not about trashing the old for new or trashing the new in name of the vintage stuff. Its about carrying on the legacy of great cars, speaking of which there would be no new performance cars like Chargers and Challengers and Mustangs and Camaros if it wasn't for the old ones. In their time, the old school Mopars and Chevies and Fords were laying down the law just like the new ones are doing now. The Hellcat is an amazing car but when you think about it its mainly because of its supercharger. NEWSFLASH they have been supercharging engines for more than 60 years and in the 60's superchargers were around and used too So just because the hellcat has a supercharger dosent exactly classify it as some new incredible unseen technology. The only thing the supercharger really does for the hellcat is improve its acceleration time and its top end ability which are some pretty amazing numbers BUT a hellcat isnt the first Mopar to join to 200 mph club. Try going back about 45 years when the Dodge Daytona cracked well over 200 MPH during its qualifying passes for Nascar It was the first car to ever hit 200 MPH on a closed circuit and perhaps more importantly it did it with natural aspiration that means no superchargers and no turbos. Just carburetors and this was on an all steel basically production car with some racing suspension and braking upgrades but not too far from stock. So do some research before jumping all over old cars and beating them down. Some people can afford to drive any car on the planet they want but a piece of thier hearts will ALWAYS be with the vintage cars and that's why they often sell for more than new cars. Watch the auctions on TV sometimes and you will see. And on a final note. I have always loved Mopar but I cant help losing a little respect for the present day Mopar corporation because unlike Chevy and Ford Mopar sold out to foreign entities and isnt really one of Americas big three anymore I still like them but not like the old Chrysler Corporation.
You really hit the nail on the head I work in parts and I get every kind of customer, I always hear them ragging on other cars. But in the end the one thing they all have in common is we're all car people with a burning passion for what we do with them. And I can really appreciate that even if I'm not a fan of certain genre of the car scene. Some great memories of growing up involved the old man in the garage showing me his passion for the muscle cars and building them. I really think everyone can find some common ground here if they step back and take a look at what there doing
Its so true Cars mean different things to different people for different reason and just because someone likes something you don't dosent mean you get to call them names and talk about them Everyone should be respected for what they like and the reasons they like it It might have a meaning to them that runs much deeper that the outside person looking in could ever understand.
Nice job on the Challenger. The 340 is a great little street engine. I had a 340 W2 motor many years ago, it was a very quick car. When I do a video of my 67 vs a 2012 Shelby, I'll let you know ;-)
The SRT8 is completely stock, and doesn't even have the factory stickyer tyre option (which lowers the 0-60 to 4.9). An old shell with upgraded suspension and tyres, with reinforced body and chassis and a fairly modified 340 (the engine in the hotchkis challenger puts out about 450hp) is faster than a stock road cruiser? Yeah, and a rocketship is faster than a plane. I'm actually amazed that even with less power and more weight the SRT still managed to be faster in the drag race.
I don't like these car reviews... because there are more powerful, better handling 70 challengers out there that would embarrass both of these all day long... I feel if your going to compare a stock 2010 then get a stock 70... if your gonna use a custom car, then use one of the best.. not just some low horse power middle of the road one. Just a thought.
Yeah, I'm not feeling the fact that the comparison is a modded old school challenger vs a stock modded modern challenger, but I suppose when you consider the fact that both cars don't meet the base standard anyway, it's somewhat forgivable. A stock 1970 Charger unmodded vs a base 2010 Charger would be nice but I'm sure a bone stock 1970s Charger that runs good is extremely hard to find. It just sucks that you cannot appreciate American cars of yesterday like you can of the ones today.
Although the edmunds guy doesn't believe that 340 is stock, it is or is very close to stock. The 340 is one of, if not the best small block ever made in stock form. Once you start modifying, well that becomes a product of how much money you put into it, not so much what engine you have. In stock form though, the 340 is the best overall when it comes to power band and torque.
Even though the new doesn't come anywhere close the classic, I'm glad Dodge made it a production car. Wish they did the same with the new Dart and Charger I still want a two-door.
All they're doing is selling their suspension products that they used on the 70. And it works... everyone's bitching about them comparing. Why? They're pretty much just showing people like me that if I buy their parts (which I am) that I can possibly make my 70 handle as good or better than a new challenger... It makes perfect sense
I do love these new Challengers...but I have to admit the braking could be a little better. For a 3800-4200 pound car the handling is pretty impressive and has a lot better feel than my 2001 Impala LS's "magnetic" steering...but it's not quite as zippy on the highway when it comes to weaving in and out.
My 17 challenger rt does 0-60 in 4.9....and they said this 2010 srt8 does it 5.4...the 2010 str8 I rode in a while back did 0-60 in 5.1 and the newer srt8s do it in the mid to low 4s...
totally agree with Preston...why don't you turkeys throw a supercharger on the SRT-8 and then compare. It's a straightforward mod and I am pretty sure the extra 150 ponies will make you think again. Listen, I love them both but either compare them both stock or both modified.
@ericamoorexoxo lol...think of it this way. would you prefer hitting a wall of wood or a wall of concrete? Softer car (not to the point of being cloth) absorb the impact energy over a longer time, wich help ¨cushion¨ the impact.
@MidnightZeto You can make the argument because the car is AWD. Through cones I have little doubt the RS4 would ace the Challenger. However, I contend that the Camaro SS can take an RS4 and most other sports sedans at the track. You, like many people, look only at stats but ignore how it all pans out. The Challenger is a cruiser and I won't deny it. The Camaro5 is large sports coupe. It and the Mustang are not just dragsters anymore.
@rr92890 I think to show just how much aftermarket mods can improve an old muscle car like the Challenger. It's impressive that they could get those numbers out of the old beast.
@aGuyWhoJuggles nah, most of the parts on the '70 are pretty simple, not much is truly modern, just several well chosen mods, the only visually noticable updates are the control arms, the brakes wheels and tires, and maybe something with the power steering. the adjustable shocks and the 5 speed are pretty effective too but theyre really not that advanced
The point of all this was to see how well the old car, so the all original, stacked up against the new one. To see what 50 years has done to make cars better. And they have constrewed those results by using a tuned car like that. That is what we mean by the bad comparison. Otherwise you are basically comparing a new challenger with an old body to a new challenger with a new body made by two different companies.
You would think by the title of this video that its about a new car vs an old car, but its not. It's a video about a new car vs another heavily modified new car dressed up like an old car. Edmunds posts videos here just to confuse people.
Modern brakes, suspension, wheels and tires, lightweight components (Sparco seats) says that is not really a 1970. Plus 40 years of engineering means lots and lots of heavy safety equipment.
@coolerdude44 Alright first off, they made the interior retro for a reason. Second, the Challenger is based on the LX Charger platform. They would have devoloped a new one if they didn't take bankruptcy thus cutting the weight, and a new interior.
I hate reading comments on these videos. It shows that EVERYONE is only interested in one thing, and that's getting off on how much better new stuff is compared to the old cars. They want to see the old car sloshing around with 45-degree body roll, putting 5 horsepower on the dyno and causing the driver's teeth to rattle out. Listen, people, you're missing the point. This is NOT a comparison video, it's a demonstration of the modification. It is ABOUT the modified car in all its glory!
There's 40 years worth of engineering in the aftermarket in the 1970's suspension, TIRES and brakes. You could even make the old one take an ipod right now. lol
its really kinda sad that the 340 is only two tenths slower than the new challenger... i mean many would think it would be faster but think about it... 340? brand new hemi thats supposedly puts out 425 brake horsepower... thats why i love the old ones... and when, with enough money, you can make it handle better... geez
My dream car..a classic Challenger. I think the new Challenger is by far the best looking "remake" of any other car out there like the Charger and the Mustang etc.
The video need to be renamed "New Challenger vs Modified Old Challenger
Most people take the old trick car over a new car but not me. 65 and I've driven both. Old cars drive like old cars.
Every thing was better back then, cars music life in general.
Nine years ago and the music one hit hard. Music is garbage now and society. Wish I can time travel and see the world in the 60’s and 80’s.
they should of used the 1970 challenger from vanishing point :(
I worked for Dodge and drove the new Challengers. They are a cool and well rounded car. Too heavy but a blast to drive, great road trip car. I've been for a ride in that Hotchkis Challenger 3 times at Mopars at the Strip in Vegas and Good Guys at Delmar. That engine is pretty stock regardless of how it sounds but that car is a blast. give it more power and it wouldn't matter what you did to the later car.
Yeah, I'd keep the 70's Challenger,cheaper maintenance, insureance is cheaper, and you're still riding in style.
me too!
DJRoast Prince insurance isn’t cheaper if you’re daily driving it
"the thing about driving this is that it's from 1970, but it handles even better than a new Challenger!"
Yeah maybe that's cause it's got heavy fucking handling, transmission and engine mods like the ones you listed literally 30 seconds ago. Get a bone stock '70 and then compare the two. Better yet, Heavily mod a 2010 and then compare them. This video reeks of baby-boomer nostalgia and bias.
+scr34m1ng Agreed! These old muscle cars are definitely cool, but they're nothing compared to modern muscle unless highly modified like the Challenger in the video.
@Jerrol Hale When the SRT8 came out, it out handled the Maro and Stang
such a great video. not to mention, great testimony to Hotchkiss upgrades. thx for making this.
I work in a garage and I opened a car door to read the door placard for some info and right under the VIN it also read. "Vehicle Made In Mexico". It was on a new Nitro or Caliber if I recall correctly. It hurts my soul to see that!
But the plus to the Hotchkis.suspension mods, is it can be put back to stock if you want to. Plus since the TA was Dodge's road going Trans Am racer, it makes sense to use it as a platform to display a muscle car that can handle.
Man, I love the sound from the 1970 Challenger.
@that70sshow89
ahhhh, I see, I must of got confused when I read "2010 Challenger vs. 1970 Challenger"
My bad.
Old muscle cars for the win
1970 dodge challenger RT has always been my favorite muscle car
70's definitely been modified, but it still takes the cake.
what kind of exhaust is on that 70' challenger?
I just watched a vintage test track of the 1971 Challenger 383 4-speed, The car swung around curves like a sailing schooner on a broad reach, it took 211' to stop from 60. 0-70 in 8 seconds. This 1970 benefits from technology that did not exist in 1970. Not trashing it, love the old muscle cars, but test them with what they came with including the skinny crappy tires they rolled on in the day.
The new Challenger 6.4 L V-8 Tremec w 392 ci 470 hp / 470 tq does 0-60 in 4.3 sec. now that's a big difference. Without his work on suspension the 1970 is all over the road. Still love them both.
This isnt a true comparison test. You're taking a modified car and putting it against a stock off the assembly line car. That's like me saying "hey let's compare my Jetta to a Space X Rocket". Its literally apples and oranges. Bring us a stock 70 Challenger and see how it handles against a stock 10' Challenger.
its calles biased information. lets try modifying the 2010 also and then run them again. easily would trounce the old warrior
They're comparing them both stock...
But the 70 's challenger did not came like the One on the test. This is a modified version
ernest Apellido
What are you trying to say? The 70 Challenger has a 383 and the only thing that I saw that was changed was the steering wheel, rims and interior.
M y friend. It isnt. Its a special built version that you can actually buy today. It has special suspension. Exhaust. Trans mods plus few other sweet gadgets.
*****
That's pretty cool.
I think he is responding more to the old challengers feel sound and so on ? than the modifications. It's true it makes you what to giggle when you drive older one. I would love to have seen his response to a big block. I would say the comparison is like digital to analog something is lost in the conversion.
Doesn't surprise me. Because, The new just one looks pretty big and it's more than likely heavier. Has all that safety and electronic stuff built in. It may be an SRT but SRT is more for speed. Imagine an SRT in that 1970 challenger? That would be blazing fast. I would love to see that.
Well I could honestly see why they didn't compare the new one to a typical stock 1970 challenger. The new one would probably beat 1970 stock one easily...
@Samsgarden I meant you can't compare suspensions but you can compare speed and acceleration ;)
I need one of those hotchkis for my 70 Roadrunner front and back!
"2010 SRT8 versus 2010 Hotchkis Challenger (fitted with a 1970 body)"
There, now the title is accurate.
dcjlove are you stupid? The hotchkis challenger only has basic mods like torsion bars, upper control arms, shocks, etc
@@pritchert2799 Pritchert27 steps from the shadows to call me stupid 8 YEARS after I posted this comment!! God bless the internet.
Jeff Horbinski damn right lmao
As much as I love a classic Challenger (I'd take one over a new Challenger) this is not a fair comparison. The 70 Challenger T/A did great in it's day but the one in the video has been highly modified. Do the same type of mods on the new Challenger and the outcome would be quite different I'd bet.
What's up with the racing seats but not having 4-point racing seat belts?
didnt this video come out months ago?
You can believe whatever you want but that doesn't change the fact that there's a 1970 Challenger 440 "six-pack" torn apart in our garage. Car restoration is what I do for a living...
I love the 4-door Charger. Just wish they made a two door version along with it.
Wait did I miss the actual comparison between the actual 70's Challenger and the new one or did they neglect to put it in the video?
@Samsgarden what you said makes no sense theyre COMPARING a modified challenger to a new one to see if it can actually keep up
What a stupid test. This is a highly modified 1970 Challenger vs a bone stock 2010 Challenger SRT8. How about we take off ALL of the aftermarket modifications from the 1970 Challenger and then get a TRUE comparison. It would be no contest. The ONLY way for these older muscle cars to stand a chance against modern muscle is to modify them. Pathetic.
Get off you high horse, It's a 50 year old car, of course most modern cars are faster.
Well the problem is, most "old timers" think the cars of the 60's and 70's were somehow faster than today's cars.
+Rick W tbh I can see where they got that idea. The top dogs of the 60s were some of the fastest cars on the street up until the mid 90s when technology really started to increase horsepower. Fastest cars for 3 decades? I can see why they still might have that thought now.
It really isn't a stupid test, people have never known stock muscle cars too handle well. What this really shows is the capabilities and advancements made in the automotive aftermarket. Truth is that if anything the new challenger has a modern fuel injected roller cammed engine with a modern 6spd stick. Where the early challenger is a mostly stock drivetrain. Not to mention the 5.2l versus the 6.4l of the srt8.
@Rick W...people don't get that! add the mods on the SRT8 and you'll see the difference...a buddy just waxed a 2016 mustang gt with his mod'ded but street legal '67 mustang... engine power trans, axle and WEIGHT all make a difference...
You know a single Movie is what kicked off the whole Modern Muscle Car craze.
It was the movie Gone in 60 Seconds.
The Shelby GT 500 in that movie just looked amazing and futuristic for a car made in 1967. The movie came out in 2000. The Mustang, and Camero at the time had a 1990s Body Style. More rounder,and curvea not sharp boxy design like the 1960s Muscle Cars.
I believe the Popularity of that movie and Car was the reason Auto Companies desided to produce a Modern Muscle Car.
Because the Ford Mustang was the first Modern Car with the Muscle Car Body, I believe the Camero or Challenger was the next.
Then the Movie Transformers came out and had the new Camero and blew people away.
Oh and can't forget Fast and the Furious 1. Doms Muscle Car at the End. 2001
yeah i know, i guess some people just dont get what the video was about. like the whole time they said it was modified, not stock and not a race car
@50percentFirebird
Not a comparison to a stock 70 Challenger. It's modified.
@clarkdef what makes the original car so special is the look
so DUUUUUH
I hate saying this but whats with the 1970's yellow "jdm" high beams?
How much would that 70 model cost though? I am sure it would be a hell of a lot more than the new one.
That wrecks the test when things a changed around and things are not stock. It changes the results and makes it harder to tell what the real time is.
It bugs me that y'all did not black out behind the grill of the 70, oh well though awesome car nonetheless...
I've got the front and rear sway bars installed on mine, now I just need to save up $ for the upper a arms, tie rods and mono-tube shocks. I think it will make a big difference even on rallye wheels and BFG radial tires
@aikenforjeff Edmunds did a side by side comparison on a 2008 Challenger vs a 1970 "Vanishing Point" Challenger. The only notable difference was the 440 magnum was bored out and was running a 950 carb. Otherwise pretty much a stock replica using the technology that was applicable to that time frame. Check out the vid and then decide which of the two you would prefer.
what color yellow is that 1970 dodge challenger please someone reply
I have a 70 and seam to have a 72 as well. I also drive Shelby Dodges. I tell my Mopar friends that a Muscle ends up where the Shelby Dodge starts out. I add the same tires to the 86 GLHS and it keeps up in a straight line and obliterates it in every handling and breaking test. Go 3 bar and now much faster in a straight line. Love my Challenger too, going to add the Chassis stiffening to it soon. But I don't drive it because it handles great, or a new one for that matter...
I hate all the people who says this is a dumb comparison just because both cars aren't stock. Come on, the modified Challenger exists! That means it's okay to compare it to something! Just because they're putting two cars next to each other, that doesn't mean they're trying to say that the old engineers were better. They're saying that someone has made an old Challenger that works better than the new one. The SRT8 is JUST a benchmark to DEMONSTRATE the virtues of the modified Challenger.
Aren't straight pipes illegal in some places?
I'd rather have the old school original suspension, it made the car bounce when you stepped on the gas, and made the car screetch more around turns which sounded and looked cooler, a modern suspension is too smooth and rely's on technology/electronics. You just have to learn how to handle the car. The old school suspension is a lot more fun, the modern suspension just absorbs to much of that fun, you don't feel the torque or power because the modern suspension absorbs it.
That's one of the most badass '70 Challengers I have seen, however this comparison was quite unfair.
yeaaa this isnt misleading at all..
1) not a 1970 challenger.. its been modded with modern parts
2) the 2010 challenger is tuned, and the "1970" challenger is tuned/modded
3) its like no one checked this before actually posting... dumb.
Stupid comparison, if you are going to compare new to old both cars should be stock dont you think ?
Einstein Albert this is why i hate fuckin baby boomers
+scr34m1ng That's an incredibly stupid thing for a guy with the name "Einstein Albert" to say. Condemn an entire generation of people?
Dogboy1960 lol Im just playin
@Pabcio
I suppose; in a straight line, but straight line performance isn't being touted here.
@rojm Major changes for a the classic equals out the differences so people can decide what they like more.
To all of the people that have gotten their panties in a bunch about this comparison. First of all there are plenty of comparison videos out there that show new cars beating old cars as well they should be with the advancement of technology. Second the point of this video is to show that the new cars are better in some ways but the old school cars definitely have their place too and can be a lot of fun to drive and with a few modifications can be pretty much on par with the new cars. Most of the children bashing the old cars here have probably never even had the privilege of sitting in an old car much less having driven one. I am as hard core Mopar as they come I have several old cars in my collection and I have driven new Mopars too and they both have thier good points. Its not about trashing the old for new or trashing the new in name of the vintage stuff. Its about carrying on the legacy of great cars, speaking of which there would be no new performance cars like Chargers and Challengers and Mustangs and Camaros if it wasn't for the old ones. In their time, the old school Mopars and Chevies and Fords were laying down the law just like the new ones are doing now. The Hellcat is an amazing car but when you think about it its mainly because of its supercharger. NEWSFLASH they have been supercharging engines for more than 60 years and in the 60's superchargers were around and used too So just because the hellcat has a supercharger dosent exactly classify it as some new incredible unseen technology. The only thing the supercharger really does for the hellcat is improve its acceleration time and its top end ability which are some pretty amazing numbers BUT a hellcat isnt the first Mopar to join to 200 mph club. Try going back about 45 years when the Dodge Daytona cracked well over 200 MPH during its qualifying passes for Nascar It was the first car to ever hit 200 MPH on a closed circuit and perhaps more importantly it did it with natural aspiration that means no superchargers and no turbos. Just carburetors and this was on an all steel basically production car with some racing suspension and braking upgrades but not too far from stock. So do some research before jumping all over old cars and beating them down. Some people can afford to drive any car on the planet they want but a piece of thier hearts will ALWAYS be with the vintage cars and that's why they often sell for more than new cars. Watch the auctions on TV sometimes and you will see. And on a final note. I have always loved Mopar but I cant help losing a little respect for the present day Mopar corporation because unlike Chevy and Ford Mopar sold out to foreign entities and isnt really one of Americas big three anymore I still like them but not like the old Chrysler Corporation.
You really hit the nail on the head I work in parts and I get every kind of customer, I always hear them ragging on other cars. But in the end the one thing they all have in common is we're all car people with a burning passion for what we do with them. And I can really appreciate that even if I'm not a fan of certain genre of the car scene. Some great memories of growing up involved the old man in the garage showing me his passion for the muscle cars and building them. I really think everyone can find some common ground here if they step back and take a look at what there doing
Its so true Cars mean different things to different people for different reason and just because someone likes something you don't dosent mean you get to call them names and talk about them Everyone should be respected for what they like and the reasons they like it It might have a meaning to them that runs much deeper that the outside person looking in could ever understand.
Nice job on the Challenger. The 340 is a great little street engine. I had a 340 W2 motor many years ago, it was a very quick car.
When I do a video of my 67 vs a 2012 Shelby, I'll let you know ;-)
The SRT8 is completely stock, and doesn't even have the factory stickyer tyre option (which lowers the 0-60 to 4.9). An old shell with upgraded suspension and tyres, with reinforced body and chassis and a fairly modified 340 (the engine in the hotchkis challenger puts out about 450hp) is faster than a stock road cruiser? Yeah, and a rocketship is faster than a plane. I'm actually amazed that even with less power and more weight the SRT still managed to be faster in the drag race.
We all know if the old one was stock it would of lost but it still would have our best memories
I don't like these car reviews... because there are more powerful, better handling 70 challengers out there that would embarrass both of these all day long... I feel if your going to compare a stock 2010 then get a stock 70... if your gonna use a custom car, then use one of the best.. not just some low horse power middle of the road one. Just a thought.
Yeah, I'm not feeling the fact that the comparison is a modded old school challenger vs a stock modded modern challenger, but I suppose when you consider the fact that both cars don't meet the base standard anyway, it's somewhat forgivable. A stock 1970 Charger unmodded vs a base 2010 Charger would be nice but I'm sure a bone stock 1970s Charger that runs good is extremely hard to find.
It just sucks that you cannot appreciate American cars of yesterday like you can of the ones today.
Although the edmunds guy doesn't believe that 340 is stock, it is or is very close to stock. The 340 is one of, if not the best small block ever made in stock form. Once you start modifying, well that becomes a product of how much money you put into it, not so much what engine you have. In stock form though, the 340 is the best overall when it comes to power band and torque.
Even though the new doesn't come anywhere close the classic, I'm glad Dodge made it a production car. Wish they did the same with the new Dart and Charger I still want a two-door.
All they're doing is selling their suspension products that they used on the 70. And it works... everyone's bitching about them comparing. Why? They're pretty much just showing people like me that if I buy their parts (which I am) that I can possibly make my 70 handle as good or better than a new challenger... It makes perfect sense
What should I get a BRAND NEW 2011 Challenger R/T or should I get a USED Challenger SRT8 any1 help
@USAon3 whats funny is nowadays is the Camaro of the same 69-71 era wouldnt hold a candle to the challenger in an auction.
@Thomasdavidallen You can use the extra speed, its just not legal to do so :)
@rojm
I Dont get it either, I guess they just wanted an interesting comparison
I do love these new Challengers...but I have to admit the braking could be a little better. For a 3800-4200 pound car the handling is pretty impressive and has a lot better feel than my 2001 Impala LS's "magnetic" steering...but it's not quite as zippy on the highway when it comes to weaving in and out.
Old muscle cars will ALWAYS put a bigger smile on a gear head's face than the modern car will.
@scoobydoob1That was actually a 340 with a six-pack pretty respectable back in the day
My 17 challenger rt does 0-60 in 4.9....and they said this 2010 srt8 does it 5.4...the 2010 str8 I rode in a while back did 0-60 in 5.1 and the newer srt8s do it in the mid to low 4s...
totally agree with Preston...why don't you turkeys throw a supercharger on the SRT-8 and then compare. It's a straightforward mod and I am pretty sure the extra 150 ponies will make you think again. Listen, I love them both but either compare them both stock or both modified.
@ericamoorexoxo lol...think of it this way. would you prefer hitting a wall of wood or a wall of concrete? Softer car (not to the point of being cloth) absorb the impact energy over a longer time, wich help ¨cushion¨ the impact.
@1337xFailx1337 I somewhat agree if you're strictly talking about looks of the cars.
old school feeling with a sparco seat in there
@MidnightZeto You can make the argument because the car is AWD. Through cones I have little doubt the RS4 would ace the Challenger. However, I contend that the Camaro SS can take an RS4 and most other sports sedans at the track. You, like many people, look only at stats but ignore how it all pans out. The Challenger is a cruiser and I won't deny it. The Camaro5 is large sports coupe. It and the Mustang are not just dragsters anymore.
@rr92890 I think to show just how much aftermarket mods can improve an old muscle car like the Challenger. It's impressive that they could get those numbers out of the old beast.
@razumfrackle a stock old challenger, no. but they did a huge deal of work to the old one.
@aGuyWhoJuggles nah, most of the parts on the '70 are pretty simple, not much is truly modern, just several well chosen mods, the only visually noticable updates are the control arms, the brakes wheels and tires, and maybe something with the power steering. the adjustable shocks and the 5 speed are pretty effective too but theyre really not that advanced
Weight is the big difference, the old ones weighed in around 3300-3600 and the new ones are bigs, usually 1,000 over that
Daddy Challenger is training his son how to do shit right!
The point of all this was to see how well the old car, so the all original, stacked up against the new one. To see what 50 years has done to make cars better. And they have constrewed those results by using a tuned car like that. That is what we mean by the bad comparison. Otherwise you are basically comparing a new challenger with an old body to a new challenger with a new body made by two different companies.
You would think by the title of this video that its about a new car vs an old car, but its not. It's a video about a new car vs another heavily modified new car dressed up like an old car. Edmunds posts videos here just to confuse people.
Modern brakes, suspension, wheels and tires, lightweight components (Sparco seats) says that is not really a 1970.
Plus 40 years of engineering means lots and lots of heavy safety equipment.
How does it not? Most Dodges share the same suspension and engines. The only different between a Challenger and a 'Cuda is the sheet metal.
@Samsgarden but engine is stock, right?
I always felt the Challenger should be "less big". Having an original next to the current car only proves me right.
@coolerdude44 Alright first off, they made the interior retro for a reason. Second, the Challenger is based on the LX Charger platform. They would have devoloped a new one if they didn't take bankruptcy thus cutting the weight, and a new interior.
I hate reading comments on these videos. It shows that EVERYONE is only interested in one thing, and that's getting off on how much better new stuff is compared to the old cars. They want to see the old car sloshing around with 45-degree body roll, putting 5 horsepower on the dyno and causing the driver's teeth to rattle out. Listen, people, you're missing the point. This is NOT a comparison video, it's a demonstration of the modification. It is ABOUT the modified car in all its glory!
the 70 was modified. you can hear the cam lope. why didnt they just compare it to a stock 70 challenger?
@FILIPINOCD ya its one of the major factors keeping it behind the other muscle cars
do a modern comparison for the mustang/camaro
only tuned suspension though it's just as fast as the new one and thats a small block
Okay, so where's the vid of the actual 1970 Challenger?
There's 40 years worth of engineering in the aftermarket in the 1970's suspension, TIRES and brakes. You could even make the old one take an ipod right now. lol
not to mention the srt 8's engine has a few more cubes.
its really kinda sad that the 340 is only two tenths slower than the new challenger... i mean many would think it would be faster but think about it... 340? brand new hemi thats supposedly puts out 425 brake horsepower... thats why i love the old ones... and when, with enough money, you can make it handle better... geez
Still a boat but I love my 70 Challenger.
Same thing happened for their Evo vs GTR matchup
of all the muscle car reboots... challenger sticks to its looks the most
My dream car..a classic Challenger. I think the new Challenger is by far the best looking "remake" of any other car out there like the Charger and the Mustang etc.