Talk:Dodge Charger (2005)

Automobiles Mid‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

On 27 August 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Dodge Charger (LX/LD) to Dodge Charger (2005). The result of the discussion was moved.

Size Designation

CZmarlin, I notice when you changed my edit back to the incorrect form, and that you used "full-size" in quotation marks, as if to justify your choice of words. This car is simply not a full-size car, no matter what you or anybody else want to call it. I'm 6'3" tall and know a full-size car from a medium-sized one. I'm going to revert it back to medium-size. If you will check, for instance, the length of a "full-sized" 1971 Dodge Polara, you will find that they were 220 inches long. That is a full 20 inches longer than this Dodge Charger. The facts simply bare out that this in not a full-sized car. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. You can even look up the definition of full-size and you'll see this phrase: "While many modern cars are referred to as full-size, they don't qualify for the term as used in the 1960s and 1970s. Consumer acceptance of large SUVs approaching 80 inches in width shows interest remains in vehicles capable of three-across seating with reasonable comfort, a strong point of a true full-size car. Edit: I note the 2012 Charger has 106.3 cubic feet of interior space, which the government's own standards classify as a (110-119) Mid-size car. The facts are all around, we should start using them and make things less confusing to everybody. HaarFager (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something? A 1996 Ford Taurus sedan is 197.5 inches in length and it's known as a "mid-sized" car. The new Charger is 200.1 inches in length, yet it's called a "full-sized car" in this article. How can it be a full-sized car? Is the defining line at what classifies a mid-size or full-size vehicle right at 200 inches long? No, it is not. Even the Wikipedia article on what defines a "full-sized" car admits that Chrysler stopped production of full-sized cars in 1981. After that, they no longer made any. Why do people keep calling this Charger "full-sized?" It's as if Dairy Queen stopped selling large Blizzards and called the medium-sized one a "large." It's not a large one, even if it is the "largest" one they sell. You don't keep redefining what terms mean when there are still examples existing of what the term was created to define. And, if that isn't enough proof, check this Wikipedia article out that proves the Charger is not a "full-sized" car: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Vehicle_size_class HaarFager (talk) 02:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Chrysler stopped production of full-sized cars in 1981." Is there nobody else who will or can acknowledge this fact? This article has the size of this car wrong. Chrysler never restarted making full-sized cars. HaarFager (talk) 07:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So whats the Dispute??

Anyone? Anyone? No reasoning = Deleting tag. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 293.xx.xxx.xx (talk • contribs) 08:22, 15 May 2006.

It doesn't simply doesn't sound NPOV to me, and that's why I put the tag there. --ApolloBoy 00:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like reasonable arguments to me. If anybody wants to delete that tag, please do so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.118.215.19 (talk) 00:19, 20 May 2006

I rewrote the controversy section and removed the tag. It was too wordy, too repetetive, and not encyclopedic, but the material seemed relevant. If anybody is still concerned about NPOV, please attempt minor edits to correct before putting the tag back. --208.41.98.142 16:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your version looks better, thank you for "neutralizing" that section. --ApolloBoy 02:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Police use

This is turning into a ridiculously long list of departments that have begun using the Charger. I suggest cutting the list. croll 13:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too late!;the list has been completely deleted(I saw the original list of CA-based police Chargers, and noticed that Arcadia and Irwindale have a few in their fleet)...sigh!...Michaela92399 02:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Puerto Rico from the list of Foreign agencies using the Charger. Puerto Rico Has been a US Territory since 1898. 76.14.42.156 (talk) 03:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New York City

CBS Radio reported 8/21/06 that New York City has decided to purchase Dodge Chargers for their next generation of patrol cars. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.151.27.75 (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2006

On the police model, the gearshift is actually mounted in the dashboard, right next to the steering column. In my opinion, it is the best squad car I've ever driven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.29.0.4 (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

0-60 times

The SRT8 is typically listed as a mid- to low- 5's car, not 4's. Does anyone have a source for this 4.6s number? like a track slip or a picture of the EVIC 0-60 timer, even?--Ktwombley 15:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image use

Can we possibly reduce the number of images in this article? It loads slowly on some connections because there are 17 images of the vehicle here. This really isn't necessary, as the vehicle does not differ that much that we need all these images, and we don't need an image of every possible angle of the car also. 17 images is a lot for such a young vehicle. Ejfetters (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Not only does it load slowly but its wreaking havoc with the layout. We don't need 4 pictures of Daytona in addition to the 3 of the standard SRT-8. I think a rear 3/4 view showing the special badging will suffice since the cars are mechanically the same. (see Daytona section [1]) The same can be said about the NASCAR version and the police package sections. The picture of the Castrol car is redundant and of inferior quality as compared to the #9 in the info box. Also, we dont need 6 pictures of various police versions. Ghost650 (talk) 17:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Aging" quotes under replacing CVPIs

I would say delete the "aging" comments from police depts replacing their Crown Vics with Chargers. For a big city dept, most of LAPD's cars are on the newer side so I definitely wouldn't consider them "aging." Same with Iowa SP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.24.206 (talk) 09:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2011 a new generation?

Is the model year 2011 considered a new generation? I know, bla bla it has a redesigned exterior and interior... but it's virtually the same exact car, save a few bits of sheet metal and LEDs. I need some alternative opinions, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.67.183.226 (talk) 15:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, its a refresh. If the Ford Fusion doesnt get a "second generation" statement then neither does this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.106.60 (talk) 04:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need it for another Article.188.249.95.43 (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Year 2011 and beyond is being called the LD platform. That sounds like a new page to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.37.236.3 (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The generations are messed up to begin with, the 2006 - 2010 Chargers are a 6th Generation, 66-67 1st Gen, 68-70 2nd Gen, 71-74 3rd Gen, 75-77 4th Gen, 82-87 5th Gen. ^[1]

References

^ http://www.edmunds.com/dodge/charger/history.html

2012 Dodge Charger SRT8 Pictures

We have a need to upload some pictures of the new (2012) Dodge Charger SRT-8 . 188.249.95.43 (talk) 18:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of law enforcement agencies that use the Charger

How about we put a list of law enforcement agencies that use the Charger here, on the discussions page instead of on the actual page, that way everybody gets something?L.J. Tibbs (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Color" vs "Colour"

The word "color" appears in the article fifteen times. This is the proper spelling in America, and the Charger is an American car. "Colour" appears six times, always after "body" leading me to believe they were all put there at the same time. M855GT (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Year and color counts

From this FCA posting [2] information on colors, model, and model year volumes for the Daytonas and other high impact colors. — MrDolomite • Talk 15:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Dodge Charger (LX). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dodge Charger (LX). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130607045801/http://www.allpar.com:80/cars/ld/dodge-charger.html to http://www.allpar.com/cars/ld/dodge-charger.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dodge Charger (LX). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

2015-Dodge-Charger-SRT-Hellcat-450x337.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:06, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dodge Dealers

Dodge dealers themselves tell me nobody at Chrysler, or even in Detroit, make a full sized car any longer. What am I gonna have to do, get a signed and notarized document attesting to this fact before people keep changing the size of the Charger back to full-sized? This problem has to be addressed. HaarFager (talk) 22:58, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chrysler's own media site downloads (such as the spec sheet) calls the car an E-segment vehicle. E-segment corresponds to full-size. Don't see what's so hard to understand. Also, dealers not knowing anything is NOT a surprise. Carguy1701 (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dodge dealers are not a reliable source. Many automotive sites like cars.com, edmunds.com, and caranddriver.com call it a full-size car. The EPA calls it a large car. I'm in fact having trouble finding any site that calls it a mid-size car. Its 120-inch wheelbase is longer than any other mid-size car and most full-size cars. You made this same point 7 years ago, so who else has been telling you this since then? --Vossanova ^o< 18:46, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Dodge Charger (B-body) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.edmunds.com/dodge/charger/history.html

[1]