Topic: CD Article: 2008 Dodge Caliber SRT-4

[jww]

To me, muscle car and sports car are two very different things. The muscle car is a purely American thing - lots of power, pickup and great straight ahead. A throwback to the street-racing, pink slip days of yesteryear (OK, so maybe that still goes on).

The sports car, on the other hand, is something you can toss around corners and curves with minimal loss of speed and no loss of grip. Two different classes of car, for two different types of car-buying masses. Both have their place, imo.

[Cord]

I'll take a GTI, STi, EVO, and Cooper S over this anyday....

Put that into the "Well, Duh" file. Some of those cars are pushing $50K are they not?

[Mitlov]

I'll take a GTI, STi, EVO, and Cooper S over this anyday....

Put that into the "Well, Duh" file. Some of those cars are pushing $50K are they not?

Yes, the STi is about $50k, twice the price of this vehicle.  The EVO should be at least as much if they bring it to Canada (it's priced against the STi here in the States).

[Rupert]

Does 'muscle' car mean ...muscle everyone out of the way. If this vehicle is supposed to emphasize this aspect of driving from A to B then I think that there is something wrong with the premise. When we are observing dangerous activities on the highway that have killed and injured inocent people surely it is time to think twice about comments that seem to glorify it. Just reading these comments might make the Ontario government realize that one spotter plane is not going to do the job. Chrysler products have been our vehicle of choice for at least 30 years and as I previously stated I think that the original concept for this vehicle was fine. The original four cylinder engine choice as a stand alone would have been perfectly adequate. Surely throwing vehicles around corners is for race tracks. Burning rubber is disrespectfull to the machinery as well as being annoying to other people. A 285HP blown engine has no place in a volume compact vehicle but it will be attractive to a few. I thought that sales of the original product were going well and the comments that I was reading were addressed to the trim and other minor aspects. Why not bear down and bring these aspects up to the level of the competition if they are not. Handling should always be equal. I must admit that the original product looks fine to me but I have never driven one. That being said 285HP would be the last thing that I would be looking for. A nicely sprung car with decent suspension and 'well matched' engine and transmission does not have to take up a muscular configuration does it? A 150HP engine is perfectly adequate IMO.

[jcon]

Does 'muscle' car mean ...muscle everyone out of the way. If this vehicle is supposed to emphasize this aspect of driving from A to B then I think that there is something wrong with the premise. When we are observing dangerous activities on the highway that have killed and injured inocent people surely it is time to think twice comments that seem to glorify it. Just reading these comments might make the Ontario government realize that one spotter plane is not going to do the job. Chrysler products have been our vehicle of choice for at least 30 years and as I previously stated I think that the original concept for this vehicle was fine. The original four cylinder engine choice as a stand alone would have been perfectly adequate. Surely throwing vehicles around corners is for race tracks. Burning rubber is disrespectfull to the machinery as well as being annoying to other people. A 285HP blown engine has no place in a volume compact vehicle but it will be attractive to a few. I thought that sales of the original product were going well and the comments that I was reading were addressed to the trim and other minor aspects. Why not bear down and bring these aspects up to the level of the competition if they are not. Handling should always be equal. I must admit that the original product looks fine to me but I have never driven one. That being said 285HP would be the last thing that I would be looking for. A nicely sprung car with decent suspension and 'well matched' engine and transmission does not have to take up a muscular configuration does it? A 150HP engine is perfectly adequate IMO.

What's the limit? 50 hp and 50 km an hour? Certainly that would save lives, right? Why bother with cars, let's replace everything with public transportation where only a select few would decide limits.

Twenty years ago 150hp was a lot of hp.

Why is your arbitrary number the point where we draw the line?

At some point we should try living our lives rather than just managing them.

[Rupert]

150 HP is approx the rating of the original 4 in this car.

100 km/hr is the limit on 400 series highways in Ontario.

80 km/hr on secondary roads.

There may well be a good case to raise the speed limit on 400 highways to 110km/hr in country areas similar to New Brunswick. This would give you 120km/hr with a 10km margin. These are perfectly adequate figures IMO.

[Mitlov]

Does 'muscle' car mean ...muscle everyone out of the way. If this vehicle is supposed to emphasize this aspect of driving from A to B then I think that there is something wrong with the premise.

"Muscle car" refers to a muscular (powerful) engine, not aggressive driving tactics 

I'm not even going to bother to address your "everyone should drive a 150-hp transportation appliance" argument.

[Rupert]

As we write about this Canadians are paying between 10 and 20 cents (Canadian) more on average for a liter of gas than Americans are. Even though Canada is self sufficient in oil. We ship more oil to the US than any single other country and even after the difference in taxation between the US and Canada we have to pay more.
OK we belong to a country that believes in sharing and it might be noticed that we have been pulling more than our weight in the middle east proportional to population and number of forces. We might even consider in our thoughts the great number of American casualties that have been suffered there. It might occur that using the diminishing oil commodity in a responsible way and not a frivolous one might be the way to go. When you think of these things, neck breaking, gas consuming acceleration and outrageous speed may seem a little out of place. A driving licence I believe comes with a tacit requirement that it's priviliges be enjoyed with due consideration for other road users. I don't hear this in this debate. Muscle does not seem to imply this to me. So that I have to give this version of an otherwise good little car a failng grade. It seems inapropriate now. What of it; I seem to be a minority of one.

[jcon]

As we write about this Canadians are paying between 10 and 20 cents (Canadian) more on average for a liter of gas than Americans are. Even though Canada is self sufficient in oil. We ship more oil to the US than any single other country and even after the difference in taxation between the US and Canada we have to pay more.
OK we belong to a country that believes in sharing and it might noticed that we have been pulling more than our weight in the middle east proportional to population and number of forces. We might even consider in our thoughts the great number of American casualties that have been suffered there. It might occur that using the diminishing oil commodity in a responsible way and not a frivolous one might be the way to go. When you think of these things, neck breaking, gas consuming acceleration and outrageous speed may seem a little out of place. A driving licence I believe comes with a tacit requirement that it's priviliges be enjoyed with due consideration for other road users. I don't hear this in this debate. Muscle does not seem to imply this to me. So that I have to give this version of an otherwise good little car a failng grade. It seems inapropriate now. What of it; I seem to be a minority of one.

So this is about the war in Iraq or our tax policy? Is it about exporting of heavy crude oil or the environment?  I thought it was about having too much power in a car? Or is about the term muscle to describe this car?

You seem to have made an arbitrary decision to what horsepower should be limited to? Why 150hp and not 50hp? It would save of more fuel? Why not make public transportation mandatory and eliminate the private vehicle?

I'm not saying that your point of view isn't valid, it just doesn't seem to be founded in any concrete logic beyond, "150hp, no more". Perhaps if you developed a cohesive, rational argument?

[quadzilla]

As we write about this Canadians are paying between 10 and 20 cents (Canadian) more on average for a liter of gas than Americans are. Even though Canada is self sufficient in oil. We ship more oil to the US than any single other country and even after the difference in taxation between the US and Canada we have to pay more.
OK we belong to a country that believes in sharing and it might be noticed that we have been pulling more than our weight in the middle east proportional to population and number of forces. We might even consider in our thoughts the great number of American casualties that have been suffered there. It might occur that using the diminishing oil commodity in a responsible way and not a frivolous one might be the way to go. When you think of these things, neck breaking, gas consuming acceleration and outrageous speed may seem a little out of place. A driving licence I believe comes with a tacit requirement that it's priviliges be enjoyed with due consideration for other road users. I don't hear this in this debate. Muscle does not seem to imply this to me. So that I have to give this version of an otherwise good little car a failng grade. It seems inapropriate now. What of it; I seem to be a minority of one.

Is that you Lauren Caitlin Upton?