It really not the same type vehicle. Muscle Car vs people mover,:spin:
I have purchased many Dodges and Jeeps through my company and they have served me well.
Laughter is the key to happiness
I highly doubt this thing has anywhere near the ground clearance of my Outback. I had an Audi A4 that was great in snow, until it hit about 5" -- at that point, it was more plowing than driving.
I'm entertained by this notion, but worried I'd be bored with it. I've driven a couple hi-po Challengers and overall I think it's an awesome car.
They are claiming 4.9" for the Charger, not sure how much different the Challenger will be. Obviously it's not going to be for roaming fire roads in the forest but 5" is plenty for most circumstances with most people.
There had to be better coverage available out there than a Fox News test driver traversing the same segment of snow-covered roadway 50 times with way too much power applied for the conditions, and the Barbie-doll newsroom commenter actually struggling with the English language.
My take? At 4106 lbs., RWD dominant torque split (0/100 under normal driving conditions), and 305 HP achieved at a screaming 6350 RPM, it isn't set up use this AWD for advantage on the track. I would guess at this power-to-weight ratio, a WRX-STi would take it under most all conditions. So what do they do instead? Why, let's try marketing it as a Subaru Outback challenger under mild winter conditions (i.e. no ground clearance issues) until we fit in the V8 engine!
Watch the video on a Jeep Grand Cherokee - Jeep Grand Cherokee moose test -- the full story. No Thanks. Maybe the suspension setup on the SRT would be more composed.
last video I saw called that was a 2014,...and them swedish testers need to put some pontoon bars on the sides of the vehicles,...and some helmets etc. on.
here is the video of the 2016 challenger in a small offset test at IIHS. ="marginal" (that is just over "poor")