MY16 Challenger

[fester]

Love it how people complain about the minimum power. Did they think they were buying a sport car?

I have both sides of the scale. A car ive built for the track, and a work van that has 62kws at 2.6 tone.

For how much we paid. I couldnt expect any more!

That's rubbish. I paid more for my auto Challenger than a manual owner does and got less torque. I also paid less money for our diesel Hyundai and got more power and torque. And it's got nothing to do with sports car behaviour, power or more correctly torque as most are complaining of on here has everything to do with a capable 4wd and more importantly a vehicle rated to tow 3 ton.

[260DET]

Engine capacity is not as definitive of performance as it once was, for example the Ford 2.2 liter diesel which is used by several makers can be specced up to 420nm which is pretty good in a medium sized SUV. Of course, as usual with Missybitchy, that engine which is used in the Outlander is limited to something around 350nm.

So there is no reason why the new 2.4 liter could not produce say 450nm but you can bet that it will be restricted to a lot less than that.

[cannonsjs]

I don't mind the look of it. If anything I think it looks better than the current one. The grill is a bit out there, but I think it's one of those things that'll grow on you.

The engine specs are ok for what it is. Depending on the gearing it could work ok, although the peak torque is fairly high in the rev range.. produces 133kW at 3500rpm and 430Nm of torque at 2500rpm.

Agreed re comments above and the Ford Everest. That'd have to be my No. 1 pick as a Challenger replacement at the moment, but I can't see it being within my price range.

[Cory]

I dont think an Everest would be in the same price range as a revised Challenger, more like Pajero pricing, but at least it wouldn't make me throw up every time I looked at it...

[260DET]

430nm is it? Nothing wrong with that in a medium sized SUV providing that's for the auto and manual. Do prefer the more truck like styling of the Everest though, it's got me beat why most ute and SUV 'stylists' try to make them look like a sedan.

[spot01]

...... Do prefer the more truck like styling of the Everest though, it's got me beat why most ute and SUV 'stylists' try to make them look like a sedan.

I think they may be trying to appeal to the family market - who usually has the final say when a family is buying a vehicle?

[260DET]

Haha, back to the kitchen with them

[fester]

Engine capacity is not as definitive of performance as it once was, for example the Ford 2.2 liter diesel which is used by several makers can be specced up to 420nm which is pretty good in a medium sized SUV. Of course, as usual with Missybitchy, that engine which is used in the Outlander is limited to something around 350nm.

So there is no reason why the new 2.4 liter could not produce say 450nm but you can bet that it will be restricted to a lot less than that.

Yes of course but the smaller they go the more they loose the fundamentals of a diesel engine. I'd much prefer the driving characteristics of a 3.2 litre engine running 450nm than a 2.4 running 450nm. Then have a look at the compression ratio down to 15.5. This thing is going to be dog off boost even more so than the current engine. Also if I needed more I be far more comfortable chipping the 3.0l than the 2.4 in the above scenario.

I've heard reports from people with both the 2.2 & 3.2 Rangers in their fleets stating that the 2.2's are rubbish to drive and border on dangerous in many similar situations.

I don't know why the engineers can't use their skills for good rather than evil and give us a stonking 3.0l instead of an adequate small engine. Also the smaller they continue to go the less faith I have in long term longevity.

If only Nissan would persevere with the Renault 3.0l V6 and bring it to the Euros. I would never buy another Jeep but the Japanese/Asians could learn a lot from their diesel ethos.

[fester]

I really don't think the Everest will be priced any where near the next Challenger when comparing similar spec.

.

Maybe not but then being based on a ute like it's peers and being built in Asia like it's peers and Ford needing to overcome the stigma of no more local production I'm hoping it will surprise. At any rate I'll happily dig up a few extra grand somehow even if I have to sell my left one and in the not to distant future there will be run out models.

[fester]

Do prefer the more truck like styling of the Everest though, it's got me beat why most ute and SUV 'stylists' try to make them look like a sedan.

I'm with you DET. I buy a 4WD primarily as a 4WD so I expect a bit of truck like styling and build as it works. If I want a car I'll buy a car. We the public seem to be our own worst enemies here. I remember when this styling started to step up the 4WD mags were down on the new style 4wds as being impractical. Nowhere inside to easily mount accessories without making a hash of it or being impractical or ruining resale. Outside issues cropping up with the complexity of bullbars needing trim cut away and no ability to retain bar for another vehicle or sell. Without a bar nowhere easy for accessories. Then within a short period they caved to the masses and started denigrating the "older" styles like the GU as unattractive and outdated compared to their competition. All of a sudden the traditional requirements of a 4wder went out the window. A marketing sell out for sure but prompted buy public perception first and foremost.

[260DET]

Have no experience with a manual Challenger but am convinced that most of the 'turbo lag' problem with the auto is really deliberate factory 'programme lag,' together with excessive torque converter slip, to protect the transmission.

Of course a smaller capacity engine will never have the characteristics of a significantly larger engine, Australians tend to prefer the big grunters and fair enough too. But the specs on the new Challenger engine look promising so I would not write it off yet. Depends a lot on how MM set it up and programme it.

[NFT5]

I'm amazed that no-one seems to have picked up on the fact that the new engine is redlined at 4000rpm (from dash photos released). That means a very narrow power band since these little motors don't really spool up until 2000rpm. Almost makes the 6 speed gearbox obligatory.

[900canoes]

This is Australia, not metropolitan Europe! Surely Mitsubishi can tailor a vehicle to suit this market. I dont think they are trying.

I was considering a Triton as a replacement for the Challenger down the track but if the motor is shrinking then I might have to wait and see if the Fortuner comes to town.

[Ent]

Heck, if the new motor is narrower in the power band then as said a six speed is a bare minumum. I do not mind the current 2.5 above 1500 as it hauls nicely in the manual all the way to readline. In fact quite pleasent.

The big issue is below 1500rpm it just dies. The lack of a lower transfer gear make slow and steady hard. Even simply starting off on a steep slope in high range can be a challenge. As for doing this with a caravan! I am talking about the manual. Practice dabbing the clutch to get enough revs to avoid stalling on slow climbs.

A diesel should pull from 1000 rpm and have gearing that allows it to start on the steepest slope with a three tonne caravan and maximum GVM. If it does not have that then practically the claims on towing capacity is marketing hype.

Correct me if I am wrong but was there not something funny with tarrifs above 2.5 litres from Thailand?

[fester]

Then Ent you cancel out Richard's theory that the lag is auto and tuning based which I didn't agree with anyway. Obviously the manual is just as bad. My 3.0l Patrol manual was a little laggy, my 2.7 auto Jeep about the same as it has good torque and good auto and the 5 cylinder seems to build torque better, but the 2.5 is far worse. The 2.4 I expect will be just as bad if not worse with the 15.5:1 comp ratio. I'm assuming this is done to run more boost to get the power out of the reduced capacity and continue to meet emissions etc. No-one believes the 2.5 is a viable 3 ton tow rig, the auto better be something brilliant to try and redress this with ever reducing capacity but still being a 5 speed I don't expect brilliance.

It's a shame our market is so insignificant, the new Navara is dropping to 2.2 from memory with twin turbos.

At this rate I could start looking at petrol again too, at least the electronic gremlins are cheaper to deal with.