Making The Same Mistake Again

Dodge – the people in charge of Dodge, to be precise – made a huge mistake when they decided to replace engine power in the Charger with battery power two (going on three) years ago. The “electrified” Charger has been a disaster on par with the Edsel and perhaps worse because Ford could afford to lose money on the Edsel – the rest of Ford being perfectly healthy at the time.

But Dodge is not healthy – because the Charger (and Challenger) were Dodge. Past tense emphasis. By gutting the Charger – and killing off the Challenger – Dodge effectively gutted itself. All that was left in the lineup after 2023 was the Hornet, a small crossover – and the Durango, a mid-sized SUV. The Hornet hasn’t done well, not because it’s a bad crossover but because there were already so many others on the market. People generally go to a Toyota or a Honda or a Subaru or a Mazda store if they want a crossover. Those brands specializing in such things. People went (again, past tense) to Dodge stores precisely because Dodge didn’t specialize in crossovers – or SUVs, for that matter. The Durango is not a bad SUV; there’s a lot to like about it, in fact – such as the fact it it’s the last Dodge available with a V8 engine.

Which brings us to the next mistake Dodge just made.

In order to correct their first mistake – removing the engine from the Charger – they are going to put one back in. But it won’t be a V8 and that is arguably a huge mistake. One that will be compounded by two other mistakes. The first being that these re-engined Chargers will be automatic-only (apparently) and also all-wheel-drive-only.

But why is that a mistake – and more than just the one?

Well, the big one is the small engine. The 2026 Charger won’t be powered by a V8 engine. It will be powered by a 3.0 liter twin-turbo inline six, an iteration of the same engine found in some other Stellantis models, such as the Jeep Wagoneer.

The mistake Dodge is making is thinking horsepower matters more than size (and type). More finely, Dodge is essentially repeating the same mistake it made before, that being a failure to understand that a performance car is not the same thing as a muscle car.

The battery-powered Charger that failed to entice buyers to Dodge stores was very much a performance car. It was quicker than the V8-powered Chargers that came before. Dodge focused on this stat and by doing so, lost sight of the fact that most if not almost all the people who want a Charger want to hear the sound of a V8 (not the soundtrack of one) and want to feel the rumble of one, too. Put another way, it does not matter to such people how quick a vehicle is if it is not a muscle car. Dressing a Tesla up to look like a Dodge didn’t do it for them – and it never will.

That is why the six pack iteration of the Charger is likely to have trouble, too. Dodge resurrected that term, which long ago referred to the three two-barrel carburetor option that was available with some of Dodge’s most beloved muscle cars of the classic era, back in the late ’60s and into the early ’70s.

It now refers to a 2026 Charger powered by the 3.0 liter Hurricane six, which is a fine engine as well as a very powerful one. It is arguably too fine. Six cylinders are very smooth, very quiet engines; BMW and Mercedes use them in their high-end models for just this reason. But a smooth-idling muscle car is like a quiet (and smooth-idling) Harley. Do they really not get it? People who buy Harleys want that shake – and that potato-potato-potato idle. So do people who like muscle cars. That is why a six cylinder powered performance car cannot ever be a muscle car, no matter how high-performance it may be.

To make the point clearer: A Porsche 911 has a high-powered six cylinder engine but no one in his right mind would ever think to call it a “muscle car.”

In addition to the tangibles that will be absent – the rumble and shake, the deep bass tone that only a big V8 can make – there is the intangible of smallness. Once again, no disrespect is meant. The Hurricane six is not the problem. The problem is what it’s going into. People who buy muscle cars like big engines – even if they aren’t particularly powerful. The 1964 GTO’s V8 only made 345 horsepower (and that was according to the old “gross” method of measurement that overstated at-the-wheels power by about 20 percent). That is far less power than the ’26 SixPack Charger’s 420 horsepower six makes. But the ’64 GTO’s 389 V8 (6.5 liters) was twice-plus the size of the Hurricane six.

Ask a muscle car fan whether that matters.

Dodge product planners appear not to have asked. Or maybe they have – and that’s why the ’26 Charger with the six does not have “3.0 liter” badges on its quarter panels.  All the old muscle cars bragged about how big they were under the hood.

But the real deal-killer for many is probably going to be the AWD and no manual things. Especially the AWD thing. All-wheel-drive is a fun-killer. It means no burnouts. Ask a muscle car fan whether that matters. Dodge seems to think traction matters – because a burnout means the tires are spinning rather than biting and that generally means you lose a few tenths running the quarter mile. That is a sacrifice muscle car enthusiasts do not mind making.

Ask a few of them.

Now factor in the automatic-only mistake and what you end up with is a fantastic performance car that is the antithesis of everything a muscle car is supposed to be and what people who buy them want and expect them to be.

A six-cylinder-powered, AWD/automatic-only Charger will have to sell itself chiefly on its looks as opposed to its goods – and that is likely to be a hard sell. Especially in view of the fourth (and also compounding) mistake.

The 2026 Charger with a six is gong to be significantly more expensive than the 2023 Charger with a V8 was: $51,990 to start for the ’26 R/T with a six vs. $46,660 for the ’23 R/T with the V8. The higher performance 2026 Scat Pack lists for $56,990 (vs. $53,520 for the previous version with a V8).

That’s a $5,330 uptick for the least expensive new Charger with a smaller engine and two fewer cylinders – and that’s probably going to prove to be just too expensive for most people who might want one to buy one.

Ford is having trouble selling Mustangs for similar reasons. Middle and working income Americans under 40 – who are the people who like such cars – cannot afford such expensive cars, especially when they are impractical (both are coupes) and very thirsty, too. These are affluent older guys’ cars – and there just aren’t that many of them to float cars such as these.

Adding a big V8 to fix the shrinkage problem under the hood would make the ’26 Charger a muscle car again. But it would then probably cost $60k-plus and who can afford that?

It’s a shame. It’s weird, actually. Because the  2026 Charger is a great looking car – unlike the Edsel or the Aztek. But looks truly aren’t everything.

At least, I don’t think they are going to be enough.

. . .

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