Dodge adds special edition SE ‘Rallye’ to Challenger lineup

[VH_Supra26]

by Jeremy Weber
http://www.motorauthority.com/content/thumbs/2/0/2009_dodge_challenger_rallye_se_v6_001-0330-950x650.jpg
http://www.motorauthority.com/content/thumbs/2/0/2009_dodge_challenger_rallye_se_v6_002-0330-950x650.jpg
http://www.motorauthority.com/content/thumbs/2/0/2009_dodge_challenger_rallye_se_v6_003-0330-950x650.jpg
The Dodge Challenger SE Rallye will go on sale next month with a 250hp (186kW) V6 and $26,490 price tag

To mark the introduction of its five-speed automatic in the base Challenger SE, Dodge has unveiled a brand new special edition ‘Rallye’ model that is set to go on sale next month. By pairing the five-speed auto, which is normally found in HEMI-powered V8 Challengers, with the SE’s 3.5L V6 engine, Dodge has been able to not only improve acceleration figures but also reduce fuel consumption.

The five-speed auto also offers improved responsiveness than the previous four-speeder, as well as an aggressive first-gear ratio for better launches. The rest of the powertrain has been left untouched, which means the car’s V6 still churns out 250hp (186kW) and 250lb-ft (339Nm) of torque. With the new transmission offering a fifth gear, fuel economy now rates in at 17mpg in the city and a respectable 25mpg on the highway.

Despite being based on the entry-level SE, the Rallye dons a number of special features borrowed from more expensive versions, including the SRT8. Some of the highlights include racing stripes, a custom bonnet, 18in wheels with black highlights, a chrome fuel lid, faux-carbon trim and a discrete deck lid spoiler.

Production of the new car will kick off at Chrysler’s Brampton plant in Ontario, Canada, in the coming weeks before arriving in showrooms by the end of the month with a price tag of $26,490 (including destination charges).

All Content Copyright 2006-2008 Motor Authority

http://www.motorauthority.com/dodge-adds-special-edition-se-rallye-to-challenger-lineup.html

[LabtopThief_jr.]

rims look cheap and too thin. A V6 that produces 250Hp and gets 17mpg city, that's terrible, the S2k does better than that.

[s2krazy]

rims look cheap and too thin. A V6 that produces 250Hp and gets 17mpg city, that's terrible, the S2k does better than that.

the s2k dosent make that much power, but it also weighs about half as much

[LabtopThief_jr.]

I thought S2k's made 240 or 250HP?

[s2krazy]

its 240 at the crank actual whp is in the 190's but i agreee with you that the honda s2k's preform better than the base challengers

[Vincent]

rims look cheap and too thin. A V6 that produces 250Hp and gets 17mpg city, that's terrible, the S2k does better than that.

Great comparison!

[JUNIOR]

man if you want to raise the sticker price on a car, add horses not stickers, just my opinion...you put a weak motor in a 4000+pound car, you're never going to get any decent mpg numbers, motor's working too hard..lol..

[CZero]

Yeah the car looks nice, but that power and curb weight is going to make one sad little car.
17 mpg city is terrible, and 25 is hardly respectable now a days.
My fiancee's quattro a4 with a 3.0 v6 gets better than that on the highway and in the city even with it's awd drivetrain loss robbing mpg's.
The s2k doesn't make as much peak power, and doesn't have as much power under the curve, but it does weigh considerably less as someone mentioned.

[Replica]

rims look cheap and too thin. A V6 that produces 250Hp and gets 17mpg city, that's terrible, the S2k does better than that.
What the hell does a roadster have to do with this? Lol, the S2K gets terrible gas mileage as well and requires 91 Octane.

[Corrosive]

If I was going to get a base 4seater muscle car... Camaro hands down...

I still think this looks pretty good, but the lack of "real" upgrades make it pointless.

[BluSiBoy]

No care about those models or brand but really nice blue color they got goin on thurr..

[LabtopThief_jr.]

Great comparison!

.. im talking about how they got such a low amount of power from a V6 when a 4 cylinder can get nearly as much. The only thing i really like about this car is the way it sounds. It sounds like a real muscle car reminds me of the true muscle cars.

[Replica]

.. im talking about how they got such a low amount of power from a V6 when a 4 cylinder can get nearly as much. The only thing i really like about this car is the way it sounds. It sounds like a real muscle car reminds me of the true muscle cars.
I'd love to see a dyno of the two overlayed. Even though the S2K might make as much PEAK power, it doesn't mean it's a more powerful motor. Why not compare the Dodge V6 to something that makes sense, like the V6 in the Accord or Maxima?

[LabtopThief_jr.]

I'd love to see a dyno of the two overlayed. Even though the S2K might make as much PEAK power, it doesn't mean it's a more powerful motor. Why not compare the Dodge V6 to something that makes sense, like the V6 in the Accord or Maxima?

ok forget the S2k motor, I just think that by now they should get more power from a V6 as standard. I know they would have to tune it and such but i mean if they want to get more buyers and the people who will most likely buy the new camaros, chargers, challengers, and such are speed freaks or muscle car fans so they would want the power. Then again i really only see people buying these cars now days to use them as daily drivers. It's like getting 350hp from a V12.

[dantheman]

I'd love to see a dyno of the two overlayed. Even though the S2K might make as much PEAK power, it doesn't mean it's a more powerful motor. Why not compare the Dodge V6 to something that makes sense, like the V6 in the Accord or Maxima?
because he is a moron?

i keep trying to tell him to stop posting in this subforum but his stupid brain can only retain it for 20 minutes at max.

[LabtopThief_jr.]

:rofl: i do it just to piss you off dan. Alright lets compare the dodge V6 to a lawn mower engine.

[CZero]

I'd love to see a dyno of the two overlayed. Even though the S2K might make as much PEAK power, it doesn't mean it's a more powerful motor. Why not compare the Dodge V6 to something that makes sense, like the V6 in the Accord or Maxima?

x2.
Let me show you a graph I made.
A stock 2006 civic si whp, vs stock 2006 vw gti whp overlayed onto MPH using the appropriate gear ratios and tire diameter.
They both make almost the same peak whp, but both have very different graphs and power under the curve. So you can see that peak horsepower is a cheap gimmick to sell unimpressive motors (the k20) with claims of high horsepower per liter. This is why a heavier car (the gti) can keep up with or beat a lighter car with the "same hp" (civic si)
http://mephistopheles.0catch.com/images/graph.jpg

Were the 2.0t in the civic si it would be a much faster car. More power + less weight. Personally, the S2k motor really sucked when I drove it. Still, it's a "purist" thing, like pure boredom:facepalm:

[Replica]

ok forget the S2k motor, I just think that by now they should get more power from a V6 as standard. I know they would have to tune it and such but i mean if they want to get more buyers and the people who will most likely buy the new camaros, chargers, challengers, and such are speed freaks or muscle car fans so they would want the power. Then again i really only see people buying these cars now days to use them as daily drivers. It's like getting 350hp from a V12.
So many responses, so little time.

[LabtopThief_jr.]

I rather have syphilis than the challenger. Bring it on replica!!!! that is like getting .5hp from a lawnmower engine, its pathetic!!

[Replica]

I rather have syphilis than the challenger. Bring it on replica!!!! that is like getting .5hp from a lawnmower engine, its pathetic!!
Sigh.

So those cars are going to sell for less than $20,000 after dealing. It's a RWD car with 250 whp for less than $20,000 that runs off 87 octane. Sounds good to me. I don't understand why the displacement matters. Simply because the peak numbers aren't high doesn't mean it isn't a reasonably powerful motor.

Here's a dyno, look how FAT the power is. 174hp and 190+ trq.

http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103141

A good example of curves mattering are the old 302's. They MIGHT make 180whp on a dyno, but the curve of the hp and torque will ass stomp a K20Z1 dynoing at the same peak.

[CZero]

Well that's all fine and dandy but the problem is the car is extremely heavy.

[LabtopThief_jr.]

20K? i thought they were high 20's or low 30s. Well in that case that is pretty good.

[Replica]

Well that's all fine and dandy but the problem is the car is extremely heavy.
That is most unfortunate.
20K? i thought they were high 20's or low 30s. Well in that case that is pretty good.
Probably get an RT for that much. The base Challenger comes with the 3.5 liter and stickers just below 22K. Also, because Dodge sucks, I'm SURE it can be talked down another 3-5k.

[CZero]

That is most unfortunate.

Probably get an RT for that much. The base Challenger comes with the 3.5 liter and stickers just below 22K. Also, because Dodge sucks, I'm SURE it can be talked down another 3-5k.

They need the monies.

[LabtopThief_jr.]

That is most unfortunate.

Probably get an RT for that much. The base Challenger comes with the 3.5 liter and stickers just below 22K. Also, because Dodge sucks, I'm SURE it can be talked down another 3-5k.

yea now days you can talk dealers a lot.

[Poptarts]

racing stripes, a custom bonnet, 18in wheels with black highlights, a chrome fuel lid, faux-carbon trim and a discrete deck lid spoiler.

all that adds $6k? no wonder chrysler is a failing company.

I guess i have to keep in mind, that to people who dont know any better stickers, wheels, and a fake carbon fiber interior trim add mega horsepowahzzz! And we musn't forget the spolier with all that added downforce.

Honestly I say good riddance to chrysler, dodge, jeep. If GM could just get back on its feet, I think their new line ups will actually have potential for the future.

[Perf_White_GT]

not jeep.... we can keep them around

[Poptarts]

not jeep.... we can keep them around

Please clarify is you're being serious or sarcastic.

The only good vehicle Jeep has produced lately is the Wrangler, and even the new models can't compete with the old CJs, in my opinion. Horrible gas mileage ratings and over priced, cheaply built vehicles are apparently the founding basis of the current Jeep offerings.

[Perf_White_GT]

i'm being serious...

I like the jeeps... and when i say jeep i mean an actual jeep... not all those other "jeeps"

granted they do have horrible gas mileage (who care)

jeeps are cheaply built.. they're meant to be bare bones, fun off roading machines... not luxury cars..... personally they should go back to the inline six... that thing was indestructible...

I love take the jeep out and having fun...

[Poptarts]

i'm being serious...

I like the jeeps... and when i say jeep i mean an actual jeep... not all those other "jeeps"

granted they do have horrible gas mileage (who care)

jeeps are cheaply built.. they're meant to be bare bones, fun off roading machines... not luxury cars..... personally they should go back to the inline six... that thing was indestructible...

I love take the jeep out and having fun...

By cheaply built i am ferring to the patriot, commander, and grand cherokee. Every time i sit in one it just feels and looks cheap to me for the price they charge.

Wranglers are fun offroading machines and can be fun with the top and doors off but still the whole chrysler brand needs to go is all im saying. Ford and GM are ok with me

[Perf_White_GT]

patriot, commander, and grand cherokee.


those arent jeeps to me... they can go...

[unitedelements]

i would rather have a genesis

[Vincent]

because he is a moron?

i keep trying to tell him to stop posting in this subforum but his stupid brain can only retain it for 20 minutes at max.

For real. This dude posts something that makes no sense, then makes 5 more posts trying to back out of the original comment.

[koolaider]

rims look cheap and too thin. A V6 that produces 250Hp and gets 17mpg city, that's terrible, the S2k does better than that.

you're stupid, serioulsy you're a dumbass, everytime I pass by something you post it makes no damn sense.

[Vincent]

Sigh.

So those cars are going to sell for less than $20,000 after dealing. It's a RWD car with 250 whp for less than $20,000 that runs off 87 octane. Sounds good to me. I don't understand why the displacement matters. Simply because the peak numbers aren't high doesn't mean it isn't a reasonably powerful motor.

Here's a dyno, look how FAT the power is. 174hp and 190+ trq.

http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103141


That's some serious drivetrain loss or an overrated engine. 250hp at the crank and 174hp at the wheels? That's over 30%.

It may be RWD, but it's automatic and heavy as shit. I'd hate to run a 15.6 with cams, port and polish, TBs, I/E, etc.

[Replica]

That's some serious drivetrain loss or an overrated engine. 250hp at the crank and 174hp at the wheels? That's over 30%.

It may be RWD, but it's automatic and heavy as shit. I'd hate to run a 15.6 with cams, port and polish, TBs, I/E, etc.
That is terrible drivetrain loss, but I don't think the motor is terrible. Well, it isn't great, but there are worse motors out there. I don't see the point of complaining about this one when there are worse examples out there like the hyundai V6 that's in the Santa Fe and Tiberons.

[Red88Si]

Personally, the S2k motor really sucked when I drove it. Still, it's a "purist" thing, like pure boredom:facepalm:

Quote of the year!