"Ray Block" <bpracing@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
:> From: jon@dakota-truck.net
:>
:> IMHO, there needs to be more of a link than simply "both cars are
:> fast".
:>
:> <snip>
:>
:> This is the perspective I am coming from regarding the Charger. It
:> appears to be a wonderful vehicle, but I still hold that it does not
:> make sense to name it "Charger".
: FWIW Jon, I agree with you. They could have called it something silly like
: "Dodge Family Sportster" and I wouldn't have a problem with it. Just not
: Charger! (I was the original owner of a '69 Charger R/T, so perhaps you
: can understand my bias.)
Thanks! :-) At least I know I'm not the sole looney out there on this
one. We can share the bell tower. ;-)
: And now they have the "Daytona" package which, although it has a few unique
: performance enhancements, seems like a desperate attempt by marketing to
: convince people this really is a "Charger" through the liberal application
: of black vinyl graphics and spoilers. (sorta like GM on trying to make the
: new GTO more marketable by the addition of scoops and such)
Yep! I noticed that - and was going to mention something but forgot.
The fact that they have a "Daytona" package pretty much proves that it
is the aura of the '68-70 vehicle upon which they are trying to glom.
(Which makes sense really, since IMHO, if anyone says "Charger", the
vehicles from those three years are what immediately come to mind.) I
hope to own one someday. I'm partial to the '68 myself, but I'd be
happy with any of those. I don't care as much for the '66-67 version,
and I just can't get myself to take a liking to any of the later "coke
bottle" cars. :-)
: Imagine the flack Ford would have taken if the new Mustang was a 4-door
: sedan! As it is, the Mustang is attractive to new customers as well as the
: purists who grew up with the originals and have certain expectations of a
: car with that name.
Absolutely! If you're going to call it a Charger, give yourself a
good reason to do so. As I said in an earlier post on this topic, I
don't think it made any sense to call it a Charger. It doesn't attract
new customers to your base and in fact, can only turn them away. They
should have just named it something fresh. It would appear that the
decision to name the car "Charger" was little more than a cheezy
marketing tactic. ("Marketing" ranks just a hair above "ambulance
chasing" on my personal Respect-O-Meter.) ;-)
--
-Jon-
.-- Jon Steiger ---- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com --.
| 1970 Barracuda - 1990 Dakota 'vert - 1992 Ram 4x4 - 1996 Dakota |
| 1996 Intruder 1400 - 1996 Kolb FireFly - 2001 Ram QC 3500 CTD |
`------------------------------------ http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 01 2005 - 09:48:06 EDT