I really really REALLY like the Dodge Magnum...

«1

Replies

  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • Black_SamsonBlack_Samson Can I Fuck It? Im Gonna Fuck It... Posts: 43,450 Regulator
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    B_AGot Em Shook
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...
    Lurker6blakfyahkingKINGEC
  • Black_SamsonBlack_Samson Can I Fuck It? Im Gonna Fuck It... Posts: 43,450 Regulator
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.
    Lurker6B_A
  • Black_SamsonBlack_Samson Can I Fuck It? Im Gonna Fuck It... Posts: 43,450 Regulator
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    the potential the car holds bruh.
    it really quite simple.
    see mustangs and camero's done got you spoiled... use to be a time when you had to put in work to make your car fast, not just roll it off the lot.
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    While I think its ugly and glad they stopped making them you're tripping. That car performs just as the Charger and 300. You basing your post of base models, smh.
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    While I think its ugly and glad they stopped making them you're tripping. That car performs just as the Charger and 300. You basing your post of base models, smh.

    No, that was the times for the R/T V8 model. Both of the cars (Charger and 300) are garbage as well. Drive and handle like boats, terribly unreliable, horrible interior fit and finish. There is a reason Chrysler was on Bow Wow status.
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    the potential the car holds bruh.
    it really quite simple.
    see mustangs and camero's done got you spoiled... use to be a time when you had to put in work to make your car fast, not just roll it off the lot.

    So you want to go BACK in time as far as tech goes? You want to have to spend money on making it quick while also spending money on keeping it on the road?? Thats hustling backwards. The Mustang and Camaro shit all over the Charger for this exact reason. They are far more advanced cars that dont rely on 15 year old tech. The Coyote 5.0 on the Mustang is one of the most advanced V8's ever produced, makes 420+ out the box.
    B_A
  • HafBaykedHafBayked Just A Nut Lookin For A Squirrel RATCHET CITY, LAPosts: 11,215 ✭✭✭✭✭
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    bwoy if i get ahold to one of them smh.....
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    the potential the car holds bruh.
    it really quite simple.
    see mustangs and camero's done got you spoiled... use to be a time when you had to put in work to make your car fast, not just roll it off the lot.

    So you want to go BACK in time as far as tech goes? You want to have to spend money on making it quick while also spending money on keeping it on the road?? Thats hustling backwards. The Mustang and Camaro shit all over the Charger for this exact reason. They are far more advanced cars that dont rely on 15 year old tech. The Coyote 5.0 on the Mustang is one of the most advanced V8's ever produced, makes 420+ out the box.

    You goin hard and ain't making any sense. I drive a SRT8 Charger, how is it behind on tech? Its got 425+ out the box and pulls .90 lateral G's and stops on a dime for a big boat of a car so what are you talking about? Behind tech wise? My shit is fully loaded Nav, Bluetooth, has the 0-60 timer and shit in the Nav, 9 spreaker system with a factory sub, front/side/rear air bags. The magnum can have the same options as well.

    I came from a Mustang GT so I know all about them. They're sick and I have nothing bad to say about them cause I think they're nice as well. I know how you roll though, if you don't like it its a POS right?

    And the Camaro is JUST now getting Nav as an option, the Charger/Magnum/300 had that shit since 05, what the hell you mean hustling backwards lol.
    rooster_cogburn
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    And' I'm talking about the 2006-2010 model. The 2012-13 model only improved on what I posted.
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    rage wrote: »
    yall dont know a classic when you see it...

    10 years from now, these will be sought after like the 96 SS and Merc Marauder.

    No, they wont. There is nothing special about this car at all. Its drives like a boat, rattles and shakes after 20,000 miles, drinks gas like pig and is just over all a terrible car to own and use. You can do better...

    it's a heavy ass dangerous muscle car, thats all i heard...

    Whats muscle car about a 6 second 0-60 time and damn near 14.6s through the 1/4 (R/T V8)? The new V6 Camry will leave you at the lights and in the 1/4.

    the potential the car holds bruh.
    it really quite simple.
    see mustangs and camero's done got you spoiled... use to be a time when you had to put in work to make your car fast, not just roll it off the lot.

    So you want to go BACK in time as far as tech goes? You want to have to spend money on making it quick while also spending money on keeping it on the road?? Thats hustling backwards. The Mustang and Camaro shit all over the Charger for this exact reason. They are far more advanced cars that dont rely on 15 year old tech. The Coyote 5.0 on the Mustang is one of the most advanced V8's ever produced, makes 420+ out the box.

    You goin hard and ain't making any sense. I drive a SRT8 Charger, how is it behind on tech? Its got 425+ out the box and pulls .90 lateral G's and stops on a dime for a big boat of a car so what are you talking about? Behind tech wise? My shit is fully loaded Nav, Bluetooth, has the 0-60 timer and shit in the Nav, 9 spreaker system with a factory sub, front/side/rear air bags. The magnum can have the same options as well.

    I came from a Mustang GT so I know all about them. They're sick and I have nothing bad to say about them cause I think they're nice as well. I know how you roll though, if you don't like it its a POS right?

    And the Camaro is JUST now getting Nav as an option, the Charger/Magnum/300 had that shit since 05, what the hell you mean hustling backwards lol.

    C'mon son...

    First...



    Secondly, if you know how I roll, you know I only deal in straight facts and figures. I dont opine or give subjective opinions. So lets take a look at the facts.

    The Charger/Magnum/Challenger SRT8 uses a 6.1 liter V8 to make 425 horsepower. The Coyote makes 440hp out of 5.0L in the Boss 302. Its also a lighter and far more fuel efficient engine with a higher rpm limit. This is what I mean by outdated tech...not Navi and all that other inconsequential shit. Also the Mustang and Camaro will literally run rings around and SRT8. This is the technology that you really benefit from.
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Rage Bruh I agree that the 5.0 and Camaro are a little faster than the 6.1 SRT, If that was your arguement you should have stated that. That 5.0 4V that ford is using is a tech power house no argument here at all. The Charger/Challenger has alway been a big heavy car with a big engine, even back in the day. I think it says a lot when a 4200+ pound heavy weight is only a tick behind the somewhat light (3500-3700) weights. agree? I'm happy that my car is 7 years old and still running with the new cars. I need to mod my shit though.

    Now the 2012-13 6.4 SRT8 shits on the Camaro and is a hair faster than the 5.0 GT and Boss.
  • rooster_cogburnrooster_cogburn Posts: 792 ✭✭✭✭
    My 04 GP(All ive done is added a AEM CAI, & flipped my motor mounts to negate any power lost due to engine shimmy during shifts) smashed a SXT Magnum the other day...they are really heavy cars, and they didnt do the base(190hp), nor the SXT(250hp) any justice.

    That said I dont think they are bad looking. The Daytona and the SRT are extremely agressive looking, and if modded correctly, can be sleepers.My patna want one bad, but I would happily take a Charger over the station wagon.
    blackkevblaziniTrashboat
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Rage You call dodge unreliable the post a Jag? You a funny nigga...
    CincoLurker6konceptjonesB_A
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Rage You call dodge unreliable the post a Jag? You a funny nigga...

    Facts>>>>>>>Speculation

    http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/jaguar-the-most-dependable-car-really/
    Just when it seemed the automotive world was in such upheaval that nothing more shocking could happen, Jaguar and Buick have tied for the top spot in the 2009 J.D. Power Vehicle Dependability Study.
    Buick and Jaguar were tied for first place with 122 problems per 100 vehicles; Lexus was second with 126 problems. Toyota at 129 and Mercury, 134, rounded out the top five. The bottom five were, in descending order, Mazda, Isuzu, Land Rover, Volkswagen and Suzuki.
  • wilberdmillzwilberdmillz Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Rage you do know stats can be skewed right? Hell I can pull up articles praising how reliable or unreliable any car is lol. Shall I google too? Fact is that study doesn't include the people that had their car repaired at a place other than a dealer. Pops is a Master Mechanic and teaches auto Mechanics at a trade school locally. Do you know how many higher end cars people bring to him because the dealer wants a liver to repair it? Hell I know mechanics at most dealers that will do side work for costumers of their dealer, and I sure you do as well.

    Remember you're the one calling cars unreliable when the truth is most of the time its the owners fault their car is broken down, no matter the brand. I think most cars are good cars and as long as they're maintained they run for a long time.

    My point? The vehicle is only as reliable as the owner in most cases.
  • CincoCinco Posts: 3,012 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If that's your style, I can dig it

    Flowmasters and squat it on some 22's
  • ragerage Posts: 5,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    @Rage you do know stats can be skewed right? Hell I can pull up articles praising how reliable or unreliable any car is lol. Shall I google too? Fact is that study doesn't include the people that had their car repaired at a place other than a dealer. Pops is a Master Mechanic and teaches auto Mechanics at a trade school locally. Do you know how many higher end cars people bring to him because the dealer wants a liver to repair it? Hell I know mechanics at most dealers that will do side work for costumers of their dealer, and I sure you do as well.

    Remember you're the one calling cars unreliable when the truth is most of the time its the owners fault their car is broken down, no matter the brand. I think most cars are good cars and as long as they're maintained they run for a long time.

    My point? The vehicle is only as reliable as the owner in most cases.

    Right....so now JD Power is skewing stats for Jaguar and Buick. Stats can't be skewed, only people who don't like what the stats say cop that excuse. Men lie, women lie, numbers don't. 46,000 people over the course of three years took part in this study.
  • aneed123aneed123 Posts: 14,100 ✭✭✭✭✭
    look u like what u like..... get the magnum hook it up if u want but take care of it.... as long as u happy with ur purchase it dont matter... tint, beat, some 22's and u good to go.... Id get black or smoke gray
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.