Is it Enough? Is it in Time?

It appears Dodge – Stellantis – is cutting bait on the Charger device. At least, the “entry level” R/T iteration of the device. That’s the one that has a base price of only $57,995. It will be discontinued, according to reports, because not many are taking the bait

What a surprise.

The now-former CEO of Stellantis – Carlos Tavares – thought the best way to stem the losses incurred buying “carbon credits” from Elon Musk’s Tesla grift in (order to atone for the sin of manufacturing Chargers and Challengers with engines) was to make devices that looked like Chargers with electric batteries and motors and thereby no longer have to buy those “credits” from Elon.

The problem is the losses incurred have been even greater – because almost no one wants to buy a device that looks like a Charger, even if it looks great. 

Because looks aren’t everything. Ask anyone. You might spend a little time with a really good-looker, but not longer than it takes. Because even really good looks cannot cover up what’s ugly inside. It is astounding that Tavares – that anyone who rises to a position of executive authority at a major vehicle manufacturer – could not see this. Did not understand this. Did he really think people who bought Chargers and Challengers would buy devices just because they looked like Chargers and Challengers?

In Japan, there is reportedly the phenomenon of the lonely man who gets himself a virtual girlfriend. “She” isn’t real but makes him feel not alone. Maybe that’s what Tavares thought he could sell to guys – and it is mostly guys who revere the Charger and Challenger.

Looks. Fakeness.

Exactly the right word to describe the ersatz engine-revving sounds emanating from the Charger device’s “Fratzonic” amplifiers. At least the lonely Japanese businessman keeps his fake girlfriend to himself. The man who buys a Charger device buys himself 5,698 lbs. of public embarrassment. That is the curb weight of the R/T device Tavares thought would sell to guys who like their girlfriends  – and vehicles – to be real. And for nearly twice the price of the last Charger that wasn’t a device.

Unsurprisingly, it has not sold – and that is putting it softly. Devices made for the 2024 model year – now almost six months in the rearview – have not sold and because they are already last year’s models, the only way they will ever sell this year (or next) is by deeply discounting them, so as to get rid of them.

There are some great deals to be had on 2024 Chargers. The ’25s, too.

Dodge says the cancellation of the R/T iteration of the device that looks like a Charger is not due to the fact that almost no one’s buying:

“Production of the Dodge Charger Daytona R/T is postponed for the 2026 model year as we continue to assess the effects of U.S. tariff policies.” Except Trump’s tariffs – which only became an issue about two months ago – had no bearing on the lack of sales last year, when Trump wasn’t even president. Trump can be faulted for a number of things he’s done so far – including the enforcement of so-called REAL ID requirements – but he cannot be faulted for the poor sales performance of the 2024 Charger devices.

Unfortunately, Stellantis appears to not understand what the problem is – and so how to remedy it. “The Charger’s flexible, multi-energy STLA Large platform allows us to focus on the Charger Daytona Scat Pack’s performance as the world’s quickest and most powerful muscle car.”

Full skid stop.

No matter how quick a device is, a device can never be a muscle car. It is absurd. The essential element – a V8 engine – is missing. Both words are italicized to drive home the point. If quickness defined a muscle car, then a Tesla S Plaid is a muscle car. It is – by far – quicker than any V8 muscle car. Its 0-60 capabilities (3 seconds or less) make a 1970 426 Hemi-powered Charger seem slow. But which of the two is a muscle car?

Everyone knows this – except apparently those running Dodge. Evidence of this being the fact that the so-called Scat Pack iteration of the Charger device – an even more expensive version of the device – will still be made. This is a gross abuse of the Scat Pack’s meaning. It has – up to now – always meant a higher-performance version of a Dodge muscle car. But this device is no more a muscle car than a Vietnamese ladyboy is a lady.

Most guys aren’t interested in that. No matter how good “she” looks.

Looks are important. So also quickness. But without the sounds and sensations that only a big American V8 makes, what you have is a performance car. It might even be a very good-looking one. But it is no more a muscle car than a man who looks convincingly like a woman is one.

What’s under the hood – so to speak – is the defining thing.

This also goes for the 3.0 liter Hurricane inline six that Dodge plans to offer in the Charger. It is a fine engine. It is a stronger engine that the V8 that used to be what powered the Charger and Challenger R/Ts. It is probable that the Charger shell that is very good looking will be even quicker than the Charger that got cancelled by Tavares after the 2023 model year when that high-powered six is installed in lieu of a battery pack and motors.

But – and this is really important, Stellantis – a 3.0 liter inline six is not a V8 and no matter how well it performs, a Charger so equipped will never be a muscle car. So – please – stop using that word to describe the thing. It does not mean what you think it means (Princess Bride reference). What matters is that people who like the Charger and Challenger know what it means and will not accept anything less than a V8 as a muscle car’s powerplant.

The sounds – real ones – and the sensations that a six is designed not to produce. The whole point of the inline-six configuration being smoothness. Normally, this is desirable. Except when it comes to muscle cars. They’re supposed to shake. It was a desired feature. The most desirable classic Dodge muscle cars literally had Shaker scoops. A six does not shake. It is not supposed to. And it will never sound like a V8, either.

So, if Dodge wants to sell muscle cars, it ought to start making them again. And it ought to challenge the insufferable extortion that is the “carbon credits” regime. That will of course require challenging the “climate change” lie that is at the root of why the Charger was transformed into a device.

Is Stellantis – now under new management – up to the challenge?

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.