So why is Charger associated with driving fast, called a muscle car and sometimes a sports car while E class is not?What is a sports car and a muscle car? Are muscle cars sports cars too? Do Charger, Challenger, Mustang and Camaro have any specific traits that, let's say, C63 amg doesn't, that make them muscle cars, other than for being American?
Why is this nig mobile being spammed all over /o/? Get a better credit score.
>>28800501The rison I posted it is quite simple. I saw a parked Charger and I thought someone is pretty based for having one in Europe so I looked inside and saw the speedometer is only up to 140 mph.
>>28800495Being American is a requirement to be a muscle car, yes. Muscle car isn't a well defined term but largely it means American coupe/sedan with a big, loud, powerful V8, RWD. With a focus on aggressive performance particularly on acceleration.AMGs are more subdued and shift focus towards luxury. Not that they aren't fast, they just aren't aggressive like a muscle car.
>>28800495these are all marketing terms, but its a case of “you know it when you see it.”the best definition of a muscle car is american, V8, RWD, 2 rows of seats, with no restriction for handling. this means the challenger, charger, mustang, chevrolet SS, camaro, and the cadillac V’s are all “muscle cars.”“sports car” typically implies that it handles well, and typically implies a 2 or 3 seater. a corvette and a 350z are clearly sports cars.but going beyond the seat limitation there’s overlap. is a camaro ZL1 a sports car or a muscle car? it could be either or both. is a C63 AMG a muscle car? no, its not american, and markets to a higher clientele
>>28800510personally i think of the RWD german V8 cars as modern muscle cars but that's just me. especially the NA 6.2l AMGs, they sound so mean.
>>28800495It's called publicity.The Charger is sold as a fast car (it's called Charger after all), a car that you should buy to rev the hell up and burn tires.Mercs are sold as luxury cars. It just so happens that part of luxury is the ability to go fast. Whether just to pass slowpokes on the highway or to race on them is up to the owner.
>>28800510>>28800513>V8Actually all muscle cars have a 4 or 6 cylinder option. Current Charger doesn't even have a V8 option.
>>28800528And the 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder ones are constantly derided as "not a real muscle car".
>>28800528Even in the 60s muscle cars had 6 cylinder base options. Those weren't real muscle cars then, and they're not muscle cars today.
>>28800528I don’t think this is a restriction so much as a feature. If it helps offset the cost of the high end models by shoving an EcoBoost or Pentastar in it, who am i to complain? They probably wouldn’t make the Mustang anymore if they couldn’t sell Ecoboosts as rental cars anyway.
We could get wrapped up in the proper name all day long but to me any of the german V8 perfomance sedans and coupes were sorta like their muscle cars just way more expensive and a little fancier
>>28800495Here the why:Current S Klasse: Petrol mild hybrid: 2.0 L M 254 turbo I4 3.0 L M 256 turbo I6 Petrol plug-in hybrid: 2.0 L M 254 turbo I4 3.0 L M 256 turbo I6Charger:Starts with a 300HP V6 and only goes up.
>>28800507That was the base V6 then.Mine goes to 200.>>28800501Sorry for your racial insecurity, anon. I bet your 150HP shitbox is a lot better than a Dodge.
>>28800495>small plate on a chargerlmao what a pedał
>>28800710My equinox goes to 160
>>28800495The Charger is merely the step above a Nigsan Altima, it is associated with blacks, and ape behavior, the E Class is just a german Lexus ES, a boring car associated with middle managers and old men, I bet you could even get some base model with a manual transmission in some euro taxi spec 10 years ago. Both cars have very different philosophies, that's the difference
>>28800710Bodied that freak
>>28800507>based for having one in Europe
>>28800813>it is associated with blacks, and ape behaviorOh believe me, the same kind of "people" drive them in Europe, sans the skin color.
Dodge's modifications to the Mercedes W211 subframes used in the LX platform included a rear sway bar that Mercedes leaves out for comfort.I'd say the difference between a muscle car and a luxury sedan or coupe is that the muscle car is less focused on ride quality or comfort and more on performance, a sort of hybrid of a sports car and a luxury car. A sports car compromises luxury to achieve performance, a luxury car compromises performance to achieve a feel of opulence, muscle cars attempt to do both and are particularly good at neither, which makes them more fun than a luxury car and more practical than a sports car with very little downsides.>>28800710my v6 has a 160 mph speedosounds like euroboy was looking at a shitty old 3.5
>>28800558>>28800559Let's be real, a B-Body with a Pentastar in it would be faster than a 440 hemi. 300 natty from 3.6 liters is absolutely muscle. Most of the v8s back in the day couldn't even hit that figure with SAE gross much less installed in an actual car.
>>28800907I know who you are
>>28800694Burgers only get the good engines
>>28800935That's because he was talking about E class but he made a typo
>>28800918no you dont
>>28800907But it doesn't have a big dumb motor so it's not a muscle car. What's so hard to understand?
can you fuck off with your pigfat open diff pieces of v6 shit
>>28800495There's no such thing as a 4 door muscle car. That's just a sedan with a big powerful engine.
>>28801254>speed-density port injected timing chained quad cam howler lifted directly out of a pickup truck>no cylinder deactivation, no EGR, integral shorty headers>the most powerful production v6 Chrysler has ever made>higher power density than the 5.7
>>28801294>buh buh muh truck motor>muh v6>muh power densitydon't careno big motor, no muscle car
>>28800898>I'd say the difference between a muscle car and a luxury sedan or coupewrong. it's really quite simple - a muscle car is any vehicle designed to go as fast as possible for as cheap as possible. nobody considers the charger or challenger a luxury car. while its true speed can be an aspect of luxury it is not the primary focus. and obviously luxury cars are usually significantly more expensive.also by "fast as one can go" I am referring to stamping the gas pedal and MOVIN. not the gay eurotard "erm actually my 125 hp shitbox is actually faster in parking lots cause it turns so good".its debatable whether there are really any "true" muscle cars left but the charger/challenger are by far the closest. as other anon said original old school american cars were made in a huge variety of styles and engine options. nobody considered a straight six mustang, challenger, etc to be a "muscle car" just like nobody considered 4 door chevelle's with base engines to be "muscle". I think modern audiences and eurotards get the idea confused because regular cars in America back then were just rwd and often v8 (though much more were straight sixes).
>>28800907>completely ignoring torquehello v6 chally retard
>>28801294>shorty headersTrash>integral Lol, lmao even That's not good, why would you even list that when long tubes consistently shit on shorties, and you can't even add them.
>>28800495People classify these things for social points with other people. They want to be seen owning/doing/consuming specific things with a specific view behind them. It doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the object in question actually fulfills the criteria selected.Same thing with people who like health food. They don't actually like health food, they just want to be seen by other people as someone who might select a healthy option, then they go pig out on ice cream in private.
>>28800507>>28800710Same, mine goes to 200
>>28802042Careful, you’re going to trigger him. Next he’s going to post a vid of him trying to do a donut with his “ZF LSD” swapped rear diff even though only one tire is spinning.
>>28800495It’s going to be even crazier for you when you realize it’s atop a nearly 30 year old E class platform that’s been “upgraded” over the decades.
>>28800710Brown fingers typed this post.
>>28801840you're wrong in fact classic muscle cars came lavishly appointed if you opted for those packages, that was the major selling point of the straight 6 and small V8 models: you could have a luxurious daily driver without the geriatric vibes of an Imperial, Lincoln or Cadillac.A Challenger and a 300 are literally the exact same car and can opt similar equipment. The Challengers driver centric interior makes it even more luxurious than the 300 which is really just a tarted up Charger. Yet the 300 is a luxury car because it has a clock on the dash and the Challenger does not, is that it?
>>28802102>retarded ass nigsan owner still has no fucking clue how a limited slip differential works and thinks everything is a fucking spoolgonk ass retard
>>28804373The 300 is pretty.The Charger looks like a bulldog but I like the wide body ones.The Challenger is really the crown jewel of the Lx platform - best looking, best interior layout, timeless design, best comfort too with those enormous and wide opening doors. I heard the doors open so wide on these cars because of some police design requirement to use the door as a shield.
>>28801842in 1971 a standard 440 hemi made only 220 net HP to the crank which is about 40 HP less than what a V6 Challenger puts down at the wheels. The Hi-po cop motor was about 305. Torque schmorque, the pstar revs to 7 grand and a 440 can barely touch 5k before it flies apart.
>>28804386Oh and we have the Magnum that has a really ugly face, then Dodge kinda fixed it later but it was too late. Europe got the 300-looking ones.I’d do immoral things to buy a SW version of the current i6 Charger, though.
>>28801840>a muscle car is any vehicle designed to go as fast as possible for as cheap as possibleSeems like Gixxer is the realest muscle car
>>28804376Curious how all my limited slip cars and trucks would light up both rears on command yet you can’t even get yours to come around. Keep on working on those one wheel peels. You’ll get it one day
>>28803639>atop a nearly 30 year old E class platformit's not though. the only parts it shares is the rear diff. >>28804373I am not wrong I think you have some misconceptions about the US auto market. For one the 300 is not a "luxury car". Chrysler is not a luxury brand, they are just slightly nicer than Dodges. They are more expensive true, thus compromising their status as a "muscle car" (since it's not the cheapest you can go the fastest). For two, I would not refer to classic muscle cars as "lavishly appointed" how you are thinking. Manufactures had whole entirely separate brands for their luxury line. basic packages for the working man's lines were not that big an upcharge. The "SE" (special edition) package on the charger for example just added wood grain, slightly different seats and a landau cover and cost a couple hundred bucks, similar to adding the R/T pack. In any case the main thing that mattered was the engine. A straight 6 was never considered a muscle car. If you wanted an actual luxury car at the time you would have got a Cadillac or an Imperial. People now a days also seem to possess no capacity for nuance either - if a cars not "muscle" then it has to be "luxury". Which is simply not the case. Cars can just be regular cars.
>>28804388None of this is true you dumbfuck, and you're still pretending torque doesn't exist. Also why are we comparing the modern lineup to the classic one? A Honda accord is a "muscle car" if you use the retarded assumptions you are working with. Definitions change with the times and you need the capacity to understand context. A basic grocery getter today is faster than most cars from the 70's. That doesnt make your rental car or your mom's minivan a "muscle car"A '71 440 in lowest trim charger made around 300 crank HP (with a 4 barrel) and 330 with the 6 pack. The detuned chrylser town and country with a 2 barrel from the same year is what made 220hp, but it also made nearly 500 ft/lbs of torque. Meanwhile straight sixes of the day may like 115 HP net
>>28804522You’re arguing with someone who is intentionally trolling but to some extent actually believes the retarded shit that spews from his mouth. Just faggy waggy things I suppose
The average Chrarger owner: a spiritually hyperobese creditscorelet from the shining city on the hill.The average E-class owner: tax-dodging speed ticket collector from Hamburg named Ilhan Atatürk (50% kurdish, 50% greek heritage).Neither really impress me as "fast cars", honestly. The only fast cars with actually intelligent (and non-parvenu) people in them are Rolls-Royces.
>>28804590RRs are not fast. They need that V12 because they weigh 20,000lbs.
Whatever yall say, nothing causes more seethe in this board than the Mopar threads:>euros have to pay import fees and pollution surcharges, hence they seethe>american incels are afraid of them because they don’t have enough balls to drive a car with this much horsepower, then proceed to racially profile em>blacks love em and are too busy doing donuts and scoring wet pussy instead of being at a loser’s website>boomers are still waiting for /o/ to work on tapatalk, but have their barns full of chrome wheeled challengers with less than 10k miles around the country
>>28804619>ebonics
>>28804619Trvke. My scatpack is appreciated by both young niggers and old white muscle car boomers. A truly baffling combination.
(yeah)BLACK STRIPE YELLOW PAINTTHEM NIGGA'S SCARED OF ITBUT THEM HOES AIN'T
>>28804510you literally are unironically retarded and have no idea what you are talking about or looking atwhy do you think smoke is coming off both wheels why are there a pair of skid marks what mental malfunction have you where you feel the need to be a obstructively combative child by pretending you know a single lick about cars to me of all peopleyou are retarded stop fucking crying
>>28804522>a 440 in lowest trim chargerthere were two available 440s retard, the low trim one made 220 hp at besthp is a function of torque you absolute fucking brainlet
>>28804727>Retard reread my post but slower you dipshit. the 440 engine is not the same configuration between models. Heads, cam, compression, carbs, exhaust, etc is different. That's why a DETUNED 2 BARREL version makes less hp than the 440 magnum which came in the same model year charger. Smog restrictions also got progressively worse every year so one would want to look at early '69 & '70 figures for what these engines make on the street. I admit that my bad on torque, the not-detuned 4 barrel 440 is what makes nearly 500 ft/lbs. But the detuned 440 still made 350 ft/lbs (significantly more than the modern rentastar).
>>28804600The best performance is effortless.>>28804619Dogs of the US empire, the lot of you.
>>28804765>bawwww AmericaaaaNobody cares you impotent faggot.
>>288047652L turbo tears…Now excuse me I gotta get some milk and a six pack…
>>28800495Because it's called a Charger.Which is a muscle car.Even though the sedan kind of fucking isn't.
>>28804763350 lb-ft grossSAE Net through a late 60s 3 speed slush box and you're back to sub-Pentastar numbers
>>28804857You're trolling, right? 440s never made only 350tq gross. https://mopar1.us/engines.html
>>28804857A 727 torque flight isn't that bad, they're like 90% efficient. Modern zf8 is pretty good but it still has some parasitic loss too. >>28804837he's referencing some made up detuned "adjusted" ratings that one website copied from Wikipedia (which itself is from an 80's catalog of dubious accuracy). But I can see the absolute worst performing most smog choked lowest output 440 doing 350 ft/lb. Assuming you cherry pick for the absolute worst example
>>28804884>But I can see the absolute worst performing most smog choked lowest output 440 doing 350 ft/lb.Those are post SAE net standards though. Not gross like tardboy was saying.
>>28804828Pickle Rick
>>28804884I'm referencing actual Chrysler engine data and b body forums you spackle eating niggerfaggot
>>28804892this mythical 350 lb-ft number you keep coping about is the gross rating you moronthe fact you keep using the wrong units exposes you for the pencildicked wrenchlet that you are
>>28804876those are all SAE Net ratings anon, not what the engines really made
>>28800528>Current Chargermy v8 bmw is more muscle car than this SHIT
>>28804996your plastic engine concrete salesman rental garbage has as much muscle as a jew at auschwitz
>>28804998We'll see when the charger is discontinued forever (; Not even the chimps want it now.
>>28804960>posts a reference without torque listedLiteral retard/10>>28804963>xer thinks post '71 figures are grossSee above.
>>28804719Lol post the video then
>>28804971i think those are both sae gross and net - you can see 1972 they dip because that year was when the ratings changed.because of this, people somehow get the idea that these engines got detuned when it was still delivering the same power but the numbers were closer to reality.
>>28804963you're talking to the wrong anon, but no you are incorrect again. The 350 ft/lb (that I quoted which is also in the reference material you are quoting) is for the detuned net rating of a 440 at its absolute worst. Gross would be an even larger number.>>28805039yes and no. True 1972 is the year that ratings switched from gross to net, but that is also when smog compliance began to make engines noticeably worse (lower compression, smog pumps, shitty carbs, etc which all reduce power). If you can check that chart you can find the mythical "220 hp" 440, which is the 1974 super duper smogged up cali compliant version (which still makes 345 ft/lbs torque).
>>28804971>those are all SAE Net ratings anonNo they're not Anon. You have functioning eyeballs and can see power/tq ratings dropped after they introduced Net standards, right? >>28805039It's a double edged sword of why power dropped off after '70, it was a combination of new measuring standards and the incoming emissions standards. And don't forget the shift to unleaded fuel which also lowered compression ratios.
>>28805093>And don't forget the shift to unleaded fuel which also lowered compression ratios.it's interesting to see how we've overcome that since. quite a few engines made in the past 10 or so years have compression ratios higher than 10:1 etc.
>>28805235It's been even longer than that, but yes advanced spark control, fuel injection, knock detection e.t.c made huge strides for being able to revamp the hp wars.
>>28805006>reference without torque >literally straight from a '71 Chrysler sales bookclearly if the engines made any real torque it would have been a selling pointinstead you have a bunch of fat iron V8 lumps that make maybe 330 lb-ft on a good day at sea level with leaded gas for exactly 100 rpm of the entire powerband before deflating like a wet fart.
>>28805093yes and I can also see the 440 makes less power than a pentastaryou can't magically make torque appear form nowhere retard it is a function of horsepower a hi po 440 making 270 HP barely gets to 5000 rpm and thus only makes 306 lb-ft, not "330".fucking mathlet
>>28805404>cope about not citing something with torque figures >>28805413>only calculating peak hp>ignoring power under the curveSo you're saying that even a choked up 440 makes more torque from idle to redline than a rentalshart does period? Sick self own retard.
>>28805453you can make a dyno say whatever you want you stupid fucking faggot, of course some boomer is going to correction factor his lazy blown out cop motor into something that "feels" right so he can brag to the other boomers at e-bodies.net's imvisionfree prooards forum
>>28805453>makes useful power for all of 250 rpm before shitting itself
this is a real man's torque curve not that fake shit you just postednote how the torque level never drops and hp keeps climbing, that's real actual usable power right there son. learn to read a fucking graph nigger good god
>>28805413>erm, my calculations shut it nerd that's not how it works in real life. look at literally any dyno graph. >>28805460oh. apparently you cannot read dyno chart either. IDK what I expected tbqh
>>28805457>>28805460>>28805472>schizo in a full blown meltyLol, lmao even. >>28805631Hopefully he's just pretending to be retarded for attention, not actually double digit iq. But then again he thinks his base model rental is actually good.
>>28805631>muh number on da chart is higher that means I'm smartertypical lower end of the bell curve assumption>>28805732no you are the retard because you cannot understand that 250 rpm of barely 300 lb-ft is less impressive and shittier to drive than 5000 rpm of 270 lb-ftit's like trying to claim a semi truck is more fun to drive than a Ferrari because it tows more, you fucking brainlet.
Anyone else enjoying the cold weather drives? My car is fucking screaming.
>>28805760Dude honestly, these motors fucking hate the heat. It feels proper punchy once its 70 and below
>>28806011speed-density is soulthe engines react dynamically to the environment as if they are aliveyou can really feel the difference if you try to get your intake air temp as cold as possible. I moved the sensor in mine to the air box, which massively improved the ecu's self-adaption
>>28806011>>28806023Nice rides
>>28804719>>28804376lol, slowboat faggot is cranky again
>>28806023Not exclusive to speed density, every car I've had feels peppier in colder weather simply because the air is denser. Doesn't matter if it has an IAT sensor or even EFI at all.
>>28805760>>28806011>>28806023boost weather is real
