Talk:Dodge Charger: Difference between revisions
Why this needs to be cleaned up |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
: The '99 concept is now mentioned. But someone should finish up that section by mentioning why the car was not built. I think the acquisition... errr "merger" by Daimler had something to do with it, as did the ending of that platform, whatever platform that was, and I think some important CEO guy (Tom Gale?) left that had something to do with that prototype and the 300 Hemi-C concept that was built on the same platform as well. |
: The '99 concept is now mentioned. But someone should finish up that section by mentioning why the car was not built. I think the acquisition... errr "merger" by Daimler had something to do with it, as did the ending of that platform, whatever platform that was, and I think some important CEO guy (Tom Gale?) left that had something to do with that prototype and the 300 Hemi-C concept that was built on the same platform as well. |
||
Check the torque output figures for the 2006 R/T. According to the Dodge website, it is at 390 lb.ft. rather than the stated 350. |
|||
== Why this needs to be cleaned up == |
== Why this needs to be cleaned up == |
||
Revision as of 04:04, 8 January 2006
This article says "recessed headlights." Does this mean hidden? (Which the Charger did have, '66-'72.) Never saw this phrase before.
- "Recessed" would be more like "inset" or set deeper than the surroundings. In a recess. I'd understand hidden to mean the turning ones in the electric razor -type front.
Also, I question the line about "re-branding into the personal luxury segment, like many of its muscle car compatriots." I can't name another single model that morphed from performance to personal luxury. I think the Charger was unique in that regard. RivGuySC 00:21, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
... "and a flush mounted 1969 Coronet grille was used. The rear bumble stripes would also have a "500" cutout which would help to identify this new Charger. These changes would help the car aerodynamically." :-D I'm sure they did a great deal.
- There are a few more odd sentences there and the text it not quite fluid. Several typographical and spelling changes were made. "It's" in particular where it wasn't.
What about the 1999? natural gas prototype? Not even mentioned.
- The '99 concept is now mentioned. But someone should finish up that section by mentioning why the car was not built. I think the acquisition... errr "merger" by Daimler had something to do with it, as did the ending of that platform, whatever platform that was, and I think some important CEO guy (Tom Gale?) left that had something to do with that prototype and the 300 Hemi-C concept that was built on the same platform as well.
Check the torque output figures for the 2006 R/T. According to the Dodge website, it is at 390 lb.ft. rather than the stated 350.
Why this needs to be cleaned up
I put a cleanup tag on this article because I think it needs to be better organized, and it sounds unencyclopedic in some places (such as the first-to-last paragraph of the "1966-1967" section). --ApolloBoy 02:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)