A Review of the 2009 Dodge Challenger

At first glance, the new Challenger is a looker. Although it still can't mount up to the 2010 Camaro, it easily outlooks the new Mustang. I can see as many 2010 Mustangs as I like, and I won't really like any of them. The Challenger, however, is quite a good looking brute. There is one essential problem with the Challenger.

Challengers always had big, thirsty V8 engines that gave it smashing performance capabilities. The new Challenger is a little more civilized. I mean with a 3.5L V6 engine, you'll have a car that looks the part, but doesn't live up to the looks. It produces 250 horsepower, and it's not thirsty at all for a muscle car! It'll do 17 mpg in the city, and 25 on the highways! Amazing when you come to think of it though. Mustang V6 is a 4.0 LIter engine, and it produces 210 horsepower and is less efficient when it comes to fuel! A big strike to the Mustang.

Things pick up when you come to the 5.7L V8 Hemi which puts out 375 horsepower, which is available with a manual transmission. Though it's a lot, it still doesn't match up to the Camaro. It does, at least, put the Mustang out of the power game. Strike 2 for the Mustang. So, if you want a real muscle car with horsepower over 400 horsepower, you have to get the 6.1L SRT model. Then, I think, you'll be able to have some fun. But, as far as I'm concerned, this is the only version I can call a muscle car. The rest of them have the looks, but don't live up to the looks when you race someone from the lights.

All this is completely irrelevant when you look at the Camaro. It offers over 300 horsepower as a V6, and 426 as a V8. Which is better than Dodge can do with the Challenger, and what Ford can do with the Mustang. And if you look at fuel efficiency, both Mustang and Challenger are really in the Camaro's smoke. The V6 Camaro can do almost 29 mpg on the highways, and the SS with its huge V8 does about the same as the Mustang and the Challenger do with a V6! So strike three for the Mustang - it's a complete failure.

So, did Challenger fail too? It can't beat the Camaro in looks, it can't beat the Camaro in performance, and it can't beat the Camaro in fuel economy. Why bother then? Well, I've been looking at this all wrong. With a muscle car, what you want is a big car, which the Challenger is, with a big engine, which, if you look at the SRT, it is, and a key component, it must be thirsty, which it is! So while in my review of the Mustang, I completely dismissed the Mustang as a muscle car. It just isn't! The challenger is because while performance does come at a price, you can still have fun at the lights! And believe me, it will put up a fight with the Camaro. But still, the king of muscle is the Camaro. It's better looking, it's more powerful, and it's more economical. Wait, that's wrong; muscle cars should be thirsty. Well, at least the Camaro wins in looks and in performance!

So the big question remains - is the Challenger as simple as it was 40 years ago? My answer is no. It's not as simple, but it's still simple. The difference is that now you have 3 options. You have a slow car - the V6, a faster car - the 5.7L V8, and then you get the Challenger.