1999 Dodge Ram 2500 Base Extended Cab Pickup 2-door 5.9l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Daily Driver: 2015 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat

Daily Driver videos are micro-reviews of vehicles in the Autoblog press fleet, reviewed by the staffers who drive them every day. Today's Daily Driver features the 2015 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat, reviewed by Greg Migliore. You can watch the video above or read a transcript below. Watch more Autoblog videos at /videos. VIDEO TRANSCRIPT: [00:00:00] Hey, everybody. It's Greg Migliore and today I am driving a 707-horsepower Dodge Charger. That can only mean one thing: I'm driving the Hellcat. Naturally, the spotlight feature of this car is the 6.2-liter supercharged Hemi V8. Makes 707 horsepower and 650 pound feet of torque. [00:00:30] Now naturally the engine sounds great and you can hear all of those horses going out the exhaust in back, which I think the Dodge guys have tuned really well. I think it's got one of the more unique sounds in the industry. All that horsepower will do that, but they've tuned it so there's a low kind of growl, and then it burbles and it's angry [00:01:00], it's visceral. I like it. It's intoxicating. It's different than other muscle cars. It's different than European exotics. I think it sounds great. I'm driving in sport right now which allows me to use the paddle shifters. I think it sounds a little better and the shifts of the eight-speed automatic transmission are a little bit more aggressive. For such a powerful car, Dodge did a nice job of tuning it to be actually pretty drivable. I just took a corner right there and the [00:01:30] steering offers you satisfying weight to your inputs. It's a little bit of a heavier steering, especially compared to some of the earlier generation Chargers. It's sporty, but it's not crazy. The design of the Dodge Charger is a critical element. That's why a lot of people buy this car, is it gives them that muscle car heritage look. The Hellcat has some special design cues that are also functional. You've got a couple of extra air intakes up front, keeps everything cool and breathing, the air flowing through; a nice spoiler in back [00:02:00] that helps keep the aero, and the downforce keeps you on the ground. The HID projector headlights really pop, especially at night, and in back you've got the LED taillights that spread out wide across the back end of this car like some of the great Chargers of the past. This car rolls on 20-inch black wheels with a spiderweb design. I think they look good. They're kind of low-key, which I think is great.

Dodge Dart falls short of Consumer Reports Recommended, Caddy XTS and Lincoln MKS, too

The Dodge Dart, Cadillac XTS and Lincoln MKS all failed to earn a "Recommended" rating from Consumer Reports. When it came to the compact Dart, the organization's testers thought the vehicle offered a quiet cabin, solid-feeling chassis and nimble suspension, but the new model ultimately fell short of the coveted rating due to powertrain issues. The institute's reviewers found the base 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine to be underpowered and noted "drivability issues" when the available turbocharged 1.4-liter four was paired with the optional dual-clutch transmission (some of our editors disliked it paired with the six-speed manual). CR also dinged the latter powerplant for sounding "raspy." For what it's worth, we think the forced-induction engine offers an excellent and playful exhaust note, but that's just us.
As for the XTS, CR lauded the car for its luxurious cabin, but the vehicle's experience was dulled by its finicky CUE infotainment interface. Overall, the big Cadillac scored much higher than its cross-town rival from Lincoln. While testers found the American luxury sedan to offer a quiet ride and quality fit and finish, they felt the MKS delivered a "cramped driving position, ungainly handling, uncomposed ride, and limited visibility." Ouch. At the end of the day, both cars fell short of rivals from Japan, Germany and Korea. Check out the full press release below with more details, along with CR's musings on the Chevrolet Spark and Lexus ES.

Hellcat no help to Fiat-Chrysler's bottom-of-the-pile mpg average

What, you expected the "fastest muscle car ever" to help fleetwide fuel economy? Nope, don't think that's going to happen. That means Fiat Chrysler will likely to continue to languish at the bottom of the heap when it comes to fleetwide fuel economy among the largest automakers serving the US, especially as the automaker starts to sell its Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat. A few hundred Fiat 500E electric vehicles aren't going to turn the trend around. See, Chrysler has once again finished at the bottom of the list when it came to fleetwide fuel economy among automakers for 2014 model-year vehicles, according to a preliminary study by the US Environmental Protection Agency. Chrysler and Fiat had an average of 21.1 miles per gallon. That substantially lagged the overall 24.2 mpg average, but it was an increase from the company's 20.9 mpg average last year and the 20.1 mpg average two years prior. For 2014, General Motors had the second-worst fleetwide fuel economy at an even 22 mpg. Fiat Chrysler does say it's working on improving its fuel economy, according to Automotive News. The company plans on making its inline-four-cylinder and V6 engines smaller, and will sell more vehicles with eight- and nine-speed transmissions. Heck, there's even a plug-in hybrid version of the Chrysler Town & Country minivan in the works for late 2015, and the company can tout fuel-efficiency gains with the Chrysler 200 and Jeep Cherokee. We would be remiss if we didn't note that, compared to its muscle-car forefathers, the Hellcat actually performs pretty well at the pump. Last month, word got out that the 2015 Challenger Hellcat, equipped either with a six-speed manual or an eight-speed automatic transmission, got a combined fuel economy of 16 mpg. Heck, the automatic-tranny version got 22 mpg on the highway. And that's for a car with 707 horsepower and a 10-second quarter-mile time. Still, with the pedal floored, the car can burn a gallon and a half of fuel per minute. Ouch.