2005 Dodge Magnum R/t on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge launches 1 of 1 Viper configurator

Get comfortable because you might be spending a good chunk of time in front of the computer on this. The configurator for the 2015 Dodge Viper GTC 1 of 1 is now online, and it's a ton of fun to play around with. Mechanically, the GTC is just like every current Viper with a 645-horsepower, 8.4-liter V10. But for the special editions Dodge lets buyers tinker with practically everything aesthetic thing. For the exterior alone, the choices include some 8,000 available body colors, two stripe styles in innumerable shades, two hood designs and various brake caliper hues. Plus, there are 16 upholstery colors inside, and options like red seat belts and carbon fiber trim. Dodge reckons there are over 25 million possible combinations, and the models are available to customers on a first-come-first serve basis for each model year. Although, two people wanting identical cars seems pretty unlikely. The configurator is a beauty too. It makes all of these myriad options extremely easy to pick from, and there are even four resolution settings to see your creation in the best possible way. Prices for the GTC start at $94,995 and deliveries are set to start in the second quarter of the year. Although, even if you have no intention of buying one, specifying these custom coupes is still highly entertaining.

Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden

Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.

Dodge Durango SRT vs. Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT | Which should you buy?

Choice is a good thing. And when it comes to high-performance sport utility vehicles, there are more choices today than ever before to tantalize buyers into showrooms. And why not? Americans love SUVs, and, while there's a stronger push to go green now than ever before in the history of internal combustion, there's still a large contingent of buyers who firmly believe in choosing the biggest, baddest, most powerful powerplant. For those buyers, the Dodge Durango SRT and Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT are two of the most potent options. But which one should you buy? They both deliver 475 horsepower and 470 pound-feet of torque to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic transmission. They both do 0-60 in around 4.4 seconds, and both boast top speed numbers that will handily land you in jail if written on a speeding ticket. Choosing between the two, then, is a bit more nuanced than which is faster. That said, the Jeep is probably a bit quicker at the track than the Dodge. We'd wager than the Grand Cherokee SRT's 5,104-pound curb weight (versus 5,510 for the Durango SRT) and 114.8-inch wheelbase (versus 119.8) will pay small dividends in acceleration, cornering, and braking performance. So, if that's the only category by which you believe these SRT-fettled SUVs should be judged, choose the Jeep. View 17 Photos But let's get real here for a moment. As much fun as it is to wrangle a brutish ute 'round a racetrack – and trust us when we tell you it's a blast – the number of hi-po SUV owners who will ever show up at Bondurant in an SRT-badged 4x4 is probably in the single digits. So, when evaluating which of the two Hemi-powered vehicles is right for you, ultimate lap times are probably of little concern. If you're choosing between these two overpowered players, practicality is probably just as important as performance. And in that category, the Durango SRT comes out on top. For starters, the Dodge is a three-row SUV with six seats, whereas the Jeep is a two-row, five-passenger platform. Fold down the rear bench and there's 84.5 cubic feet of cargo area in the Durango, versus 68.7 in the Grand Cherokee. And if you tow, the Durango SRT's 8,600-pound max rating handily bests that of the Grand Cherokee SRT's 7,200-pound capacity. Ask yourself what's most important: performance or practicality. And then consider the price. The Dodge is nearly $4,000 less expensive than the Jeep.