Discussion in 'New Challenger, 300, Magnum, Charger' started by hemi_magnum, Nov 21, 2005.
Enjoy the red x's??
Nope. Enjoy the images that will magically appear when you refresh the page.
:wub: :wub: :wub:
The Classic R/T comes with a T/A style stripe, polished Torq Thrust wheels, and old-school "Challenger" badges on the fender. Looks gorgeous in that B5 color.
The View Fom the Wall Street Journal.
THE MAD DUCK
Stratuscaster beat me to it. Thank you, sir!
Thank you! Now... 27J or 27M? Decisions, decisions.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE "J" AND THE "M", BOTH ARE RT's, SO IS IT A PACKAGE CHANGE?
JUST TRYING TO STAY INFORMED, I'M 2 WEEKS INTO AN ORDER ON A "21X", AND WONDERING IF I SHOULD HAVE WAITED A LITTLE LONGER??????
According to the brochure linked above, the M package is the Classic R/T, adding script badging, large side stripes and the retro chrome wheels.
I'm just not sure about 20" wheels or the big stripes though. I think I'll be perfectly happy with J, the 18's and the lower rear gear ratio. I may try to find after market wheels that I like better. I'm most interested in the functional shaker hood, cold air intake and raised spoiler which I think results in a really sharp looking ride.
Something tells me you could unload the set of 20's rather easily to some Challenger SE buyer...
That's been my hangup with the SRT, I keep thinking they could have done more with the wheels, although they are kinda growing on me.
Now that I see these 20" "Classic's" I'm thinking they'd look good on the black, I wonder if they'd trade wheels??????
By the way, thanks for the explanation of the "J" "M" thing
Very possible, but the Track Pak changes my rear from 3.73 w/ 18's to 3.92 w/ 20's and I'm fine with a 3.73 rear. I wonder what the 20's would do to an SE with its even lower rear gear?
This does raise a question for me...all other things being equal, what might the expected differences be between an R/T with 3.73 and 18's vs. 3.92 and 20's? Faster starts with the 3.92? Lower fuel economy though? (I know it's ridiculous to talk about fuel economy with this car, but I am anyway. ) Any thoughts?
For those that do it for the "bling" (ie; base 300 2.7 owners with 20" and larger wheels) - it may not matter.
True dat, homey! Total diameter can't be that different though since the smaller wheels have taller tires on them.
Taller overall tire height will improve mileage, but the shorter rear end might negate that.
Here are the standard overall diameters for the wheels and tires:
SE E pkg, P215/65R17 = 28 inches
SE G pkg, P225/60R18 = 28.6 inches
R/T F and J pkg, P235/55R18 = 28.1 inches
R/T M pkg and SRT8, P245/45ZR20 = 28.6 inches
All roughly within 1/2 inch of each other.
Wow, your quick, I went and snoped around a couple of lots to get the same measurements.
Anyway, about the fuel, the online chat with the engineer the other week, this came up, now everything regarding this revolved around the SRT platform, but he said that the auto with (??) gears, vs. the 6 spd with 3.92's, the stick should get the same to 1 maybe 2 mpg better, that's if you can believe the engineers , in the RT with the 5.7 and all of the changes they made to that engine for this year, it'll probably be more of a difference. If you really look at the gear break downs in the sticks, the first 4 gears are set up for performance, 5 and 6 are definetly getting into the overdrive category, which is pretty much how he described it. Image that.
I don't think the wheel/tire combo's will matter hardly at all unless you change the tire package to something off what they have figured, i.e. 26" or 29" diameters, something like that.