By on November 17, 2008

We’ve had a few confused comments on the Dodge EV vs. Challenger “drag race” video, so we thought we’d fill in some details. And post something between Bailout Watches. First of all, the stunt was choreographed by Chrysler. ENVI President Lou Rhodes is behind the wheel of the Dodge EV while a weak-ankled Chrysler employee handles a Challenger 6.1 with octegenarian restraint. Clearly this was intended as a PR two-fer. Chrysler gets to show off its Tesla wannabe and its muscle car, while giving the LA Times the opportunity to write about how Chrysler’s EVs and EREVs are the future. And clearly the point was to give the Challenger the fuzzy end of the lollypop in order to show just how advanced the Chrysler EV program is. Maybe next time they could be a little more convincing. The video doesn’t so much make the Dodge EV look like a muscle-car-beating dynamo, as it makes the Challenger look like a secretary special. The LA Times’ Dan Neil admits that the Challenger was launched in second gear in both runs, and that it “seems to let up” on the second run. Nobody will say for sure if it was a lift-off or an audio effect caused by the rev limiter. Regardless of the actual details, the real point of these video stunts is to look cool, and it’s in this crucial consideration that the video really lets down. Had the Challenger sat on the starting line, dramaticaly gasifying its tires while the EV scooted to victory, the PR “message” would have remained the same and it would have looked a lot better. As it went down, the stunt looked staged and neither car came out looking heroic. Better luck next time.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

13 Comments on “Chrysler Fought Reality And Reality Lost...”


  • avatar

    A proper PR demo would have been on a twisty track where the EV’s Lotus engineering would leave the Challenger in the dust. Obviously only one or two laps could be done because the EV would run out of juice. Which oddly reminds me of Chrysler in general.

  • avatar

    This is ridiculous. Launched in 2nd gear? Just because your company is heading down the toilet doesn’t mean you need to stoop to being craptastic along the way. At least go out with some dignity.

  • avatar
    seoultrain

    Why use a challenger? Do they enjoy showing up their own products? I’d have done a slalom against a Mustang. That would have been legitimate and comical.

  • avatar
    cmus

    mmmm…Challenger. (nice pic on this article)

    oh, right, sorry.

    The video was stupid. Most likely, it was the ENVI folks cooking this up on their own. Chrysler PR folks probably making many of the same comments we are.

    EV’s cool. I’ll be happy to get one in 10 years when the battery/power systems have progressed enough to make a Challenger EV practical.

  • avatar
    brush

    cmus,

    Here’s your battery technology

    http://www.zulenet.com/electriceco/sustainable_electricity.html

    Instant recharge at a “fuel” station, non volatile fluids, no expensive storage infrastructures.

  • avatar
    doug

    The only thing Chrysler about the DodgeEV is the paint job. It’s just a converted Lotus Europa with a motor by UQM. I wouldn’t be surprised if UQM was contracted to do the conversion for them. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, per se. But to claim this is a product of Chrysler engineering feels dishonest and just a stunt for a bailout.

  • avatar
    benders

    You guys made Wired

  • avatar
    doug

    Man… It looks like they’re trying to hide the evidence. Compare the photo at the bottom of the Wired article with this one.

  • avatar
    danielneil

    Hello guys,

    Dan Neil here. Thanks for TTAC for the notice, but wanted to clarify the events here. Xler rolled out its three electron buggies for a low-speed flog for some journalists at the Rose Bowl. At the end of the day, boys being boys, Lou Rhodes hopped in the Dodge EV — which is lighter and more powerful than the stock Lotus Europa, btw — and lined up against a Challenger, on a shortish run, certainly not a quarter mile. I’m guessing 800-900 feet. The whole time we’re a bit frantic to get off a couple of runs before the Rose Bowl Gestapo could stop us. Anywho, the Dodge EV with 100 percent traction and 100 percent torque off the line, easily moves off against the Challenger, which spins pretty fierce-like on the low-mu surface of the Rose Bowl parking lot. First run, the Challenger smokes in the hole, in FIRST gear, collects itself and is gaining ground toward the end. Second run, either the engineer lets off or he spins the wheels well and truly in 2nd, hitting the rev limiter and bogging down. The latter version is what the Xler engineer says, tho from the outside it sort of seemed like he let up. Hard to tell, really.

    Now, let there be no doubt, the Dodge EV is wayyy quicker off the line, as you’d expect for a lightweight sports car with a lightning bolt up its ass. However, on a proper quarter-mile, the Challenger would inevitably catch the Dodge EV, for no other reason than for the EV’s single gearing.

    There’s no bad faith, no chicanery, just a couple of hasty runs in a parking lot to demonstrate that, you know, a little electric sports car get get off the bolt quick.

    PS: after the two runs, the batteries and motor were nice and cool.

    Thanks for caring, and all best to TTAC denizens.

    Dan

  • avatar
    Strippo

    Xler

    Sacrilege!

  • avatar
    benders

    So…the EV is faster off the line (more torque, lighter) but the Challenger is the one spinning it’s tires?

    brush: The problem with the Redox battery is low energy density. It’s about half that of NiMH batteries.

  • avatar

    Woohoo, Wired called you “curmudgeons,” and we got called “denizens” by Daniel Neil.

    The explanation does seem to be reasonable, but I smell a T-shirt opportunity.

    “Curmudgeons and denizens UNITE! @ thetruthaboutcars.com” or something of that nature.

  • avatar
    Ingvar

    The evidence of 200+ death watches are finally sinking in. The more time that passes, the more people are discovering: “Those guys at TTAC wasn’t that bad after all.” To me, it seems that other media speaks more respectfully of TTAC. Perhaps I’m wrong? I don’t know, but that is the impression I get.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
  • theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
  • A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
  • Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
  • Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber