The new Dodge Charger cop car

Loading thread data ...

You do understand that all the lawsuits with the CV are from high speed rear-end collisions that happen with the CV is stopped, right?

Nothing to do with horsepower.

Reply to
Mark

What's the top speed of this thing anyway? Are we to assume it's faster than the CV just because it has a 160 speedo? It's top speed may be no different than the CV, but getting there will be faster.

Even small towns can benefit from this by being able to catch up to speeders faster and getting around slow traffic a little quicker. Power is good as long as you know how to use it.

They've had options forever and a day, but have refused to take action on it. They have been very lax with the CV in total. It hasn't changed since

98.....that's rather pathetic. Sure, there have been small tweaks here and there, but no styling or mechanical changes in 7, soon to be 8, years.

Change can be a good thing and if Chrysler is serious about getting back to their roots in the police market, they will probably surpass Ford with little effort.

Reply to
Mark

I don't remember the particulars but the one I'm thinking of required welding or even frame replacement if the cracks were found. I THINK the cracks were near rear suspension mounting points. I only saw a couple of the covered vehicles and no cracks,so it IS possible that my memory is faulty. If you have access to recalls lists,could you check it out? I would like to know just to satisfy my own curiousity. The more I think about it, it's possible that it was a Broadcast Message dealing only with a few vehicles? I just remember the other Techs all groaning and bitching about it.

Reply to
Tom Adkins

The PI engine - Product-Improved - not Police Interceptor, in 2001 was a somewhat significant change. The other would have to be that the

2003-up CV/GM now has speed sensitive rack-&-pinion steering and hydroformed frame.

Tweaks & revisions are almost continual, but why mess too much w/ success? If the RWD Caprice & Impala were still being built, they would have likely followed similar gradual developement.

If you want to go w/ just "tweaks & revisions", you could almost say the CV hasn't changed since fall, 1978!

Rob

Reply to
trainfan1

Didn't think you'd have the guts. Thanks for proving it.

Brad

Reply to
Brad and Mia

I just don't consider either of those changes "significant". I don't think anyone does.

You're right. We should all be still driving Model T's by this logic. That was a hell of a car....

Come on. You don't seriously believe that, do you? 91 to 92 alone was a completely new vehicle.

Reply to
Mark
1990 Crown Victoria

Curb Weight - Automatic (lb.) 3978 Wheelbase (in.) 114.30 Length (in.) 215.70 Width (in.) 79.30 Height (in.) 56.50 Track Front (in.) 62.8 Track Rear (in.) 63.3

1992 Crown Victoria

Curb Weight - Automatic (lb.) 3748 Wheelbase (in.) 114.40 Length (in.) 212.40 Width (in.) 77.80 Height (in.) 56.70 Track Front (in.) 62.80 Track Rear (in.) 63.30

A 1992 Crown Victoria may have looked "all new" but except for the engine, the basic chassis and drive train was little changed from 1978. My Mother has owned a series of full size Ford products over the years (1957, 1969, 1972, 1978, 1985,

1992, 2000). The body and engine may have changed in 1992, but if you flip one over, it will look very much like a 1978.

Ed

Mark wrote:

Reply to
C. E. White

Hogwash, there is almost nothing in common between the 2005 and the 1978 CV, even the frame is different. Just bout everything has been changed incrementally over the years, the only thing they have in common any more is the firewall and front floor pan, get real.

mike hunt

"C. E. White" wrote:

Reply to
DustyRhoades

Make that the entire drivetrain.

I'm sorry, but keeping frame and suspension measurements the same does not mean the car hasn't changed.

Reply to
Mark

I didn't say they were the exact same part numbers, but the basic layout and design concepts (suspension geometry, engine position, basic drivetrain except for the engine) is the same. Is a 2005 CV a better car than a 1990 CV - yes. Is it "tecnologically" a lot different - No. At no point in the last 25 years could you point to a model year where there was radical change (like between a 1985 Farimont and a 1986 Taurus). The biggest delta in the last 25 was the 1992 model year - new look, new engine, dropped the wagon, but the basic underpinnings except for the engine were very similar (if not identical). Since 1960 I think you can look at big Fords as having had major shifts in design in 1965, 1972,

1978, and.......

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Rear axle? Transmission? The only part of the drivetrain that was "new" was the engine (yeah, I know the transisison had to have a different bellhousing for the mod engine).

The basic suspension geometry didn't cahnge, the type of parts didn't change, etc. To me, "all new" is more than just new sheet metal and rolling a few part numbers.

The current CVs are good cars, but they are just a refreshed version of a 26 year old design (1979 to present). I have no doubt that virtually every part has been refined in the last

25 years, but refining is not replacing.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Which is why they are relatively inexpensive & trouble-free. There were a couple years, I think twice, the C/V actually went down in price. I think once was at the sheet metal & Watts linkage change - 1998. The other was like 93 going to the 94 model or in that area.

Rob

Reply to
trainfan1

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.