Well that didn’t take long. From stupid-ass dealer mark-ups to employee pricing discounts and/or zero percent financing in just over a year. Those fire-sale prices include the Dodge Challenger SRT8, despite the website’s fine print. In fact, the word on the street says you can get $4k off said top-of-the-line pavement smoker without much haggling. More if you’ve got a hard nose and cold cash (preferably financing, but beggars can be choosers these days). If you were waiting for the Challenger SRT8 to get some much-needed handling updates (e.g., a real limited slip diff), let it go. Saying that, who gives a NSFW about corners? I want me one of them 1000 NHRA Drag Race package Challengers, with added lightness, a shortened wheelbase and, uh, stuff. The livery’s not the worst I’ve ever seen. Okay, it is. But. I mean. Well. Anyway, it’s time for those TIWWRS (this is what we’ll really sell) six-cylinder Challengers to see if they can play Hertz. Only, the Challenger makes a lousy rental car with its challenged packaging and not-so-hot fuel economy. Oh, and the reason I’m blogging this now? A friend tried to sell me an immaculate a 10k mile Challenger SRT8 for $25 grand. Ouch. Quick aside. Is it me, or do all these guy vs. guy, middle-of-the-night drag race ads have a homosexual subtext?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
right now, everyone who is lucky enough to have a job should be saving money and paying off their debts.
I’m carrying a total credit card balance of $1 because I screwed up and bought an itunes song on my Ccard rather than my debit.
dealers are HURTIN.
homeowners are Hurtin
I’m preparing to close on a new house for $300K which was appraised for $500K because the homeowner KNOWS he can’t get the true value for it and he’d just end up losing it.
If you’re planning to buy a new car just wait a year and then go for it. If the dealer is lucky enough to still exist you’ll get stupid discounts on it.
Flashpoint is right. However, I still would consider that Challenger for $25k. As long as you have the cash.
I still like the Challenger. Too bad Chrysler is owned by a bunch of clueless blood sucking Wall St. types – makes me afraid to buy one.
And watch your stock purchases.
If you think $25k on an immac Srt8 is a haircut, let me introduce you to my BAC(nee MER), FNM and C portfolio.
I am wanting/needing two new rides soon but will use spit and tissue to keep mine running until we get to the bottom.
I wonder if 1 year will shake the trees loose Flashpoint?
“Quick aside. Is it me…?”
Yup. Why do you ask?
First of all, our bailout money to the banks has basically been stolen. The banks are trying to clean their portfolios and are holding our money hostage to try and ensure they have some solvency. They aren’t loaning or making credit card accounts.
This is actually a good thing. Americans are finally learning to live in their means – unfortunately it comes with unemployment and the revoking of easy access credit.
I feel better than ever clearing my credit debt.
As for buying cars – I’m saving towards the 2012 S-class.
$25,000 for a Challenger with 10,000 miles isn’t bad. I paid $27,000 total for a Chrysler 300 2.7L with 22 inch chrome rims.
I was looking at them in the middle of December and my local dealer was already offering $2k off of MSRP. Just a month or two earlier people (morons) were still paying up to $5k over sticker.
Each day, I drive by the same 10 Challengers covered with snow at the local dealer. With that, I’d be surprised if you couldn’t get a big discount on them. After all, it’s still just a damn car, a “dealer unit,” and an impractical one at that (from a company that may be dead in two months).
I happen to like the Challenger styling a lot (for a retro car); much better then the freaky, crack-inspired, Camaro. Handling? Ha. The numbers may be good, but how does it feel compared to say a GTI?
I still can’t figure out why Chrysler would bring back what was a low volume sales dud when it first came out. From 83,000 units the first year to 29,000 the next. Total of 189,000 for 5 model years. WTF was the reasoning ?
And there is nowhere near the market for these “pony cars” that there was in 1970. What was the purpose of this whole exercise ?
I am surprised they haven’t whored out the Sebring or 300 a bit with wire wheels, vinyl top and a waterfall grille and called it the Imperial.
The car looks good, but it’s the size of a Cordoba.I just don’t get it
The purpose of the exercise was to have a “halo” car, something new that would get people into showrooms to ultimately buy….anything. Usually works, however when all but the unwashed know Chrysler is finished, it becomes a waste.
I always wanted this car up until hearing how much it weighed.
I think the Challenger is pretty clever. When Mercedes-Benz dumped Chrysler it left the company with its product development capability essentially gutted. The Challenger is a Charger with four inches out of the middle and a mild reskin — it can be built on the same lines with the same components. Really it’s nothing more than a two-door Charger but the retro styling and Mopar performance heritage give it the market footprint of a totally new and separate vehicle.
True, it’s not a high-volume vehicle but it was not designed to be, and it doesn’t have to move big numbers to be successful. When the market for the Magnum wagon was satisfied, the Challenger was slipped right into its place.
One of the Dodge dealers in my community is a stereotypical “buy American” guy, complete with 46″ waist, gold jewelry, cigars, and open neck shirts. think Fat Elvis and you’ll get the picture.
Well, Mr. Buy American has recently added Subaru to his dealership. Of course, Subarus are built in America, yadda, yadda, yadda.
He has a row of Challengers parked on the front of his lot where they can be seen by the high volume of traffic passing by. The same number of Challengers has been parked there for months. Some weekends they have large balloons attached to them, and a local radio station doing a live remote. His back lot is packed full with other Chryco units.
I stopped in last week mildly interested is seeing what kind of deal could be made on a 2009 Ram pickup. I mentioned the Challengers to the salesguy. His comment was “people come in to look at the Challengers and wind up buying an Outback or a WRX”.
I’m going to wait for the Buy a Ram Get a Challenger at Half Price sale. Although that Leagacy GT with the turbo engine is sweeeet…..
This hardly is the car’s fault. Credit is tighter than a rat’s ass and people are worried about whether they will be employed next month. Hell, even the poster children vehicles from the land of the Rising Sun can be had with big discounts and zero interest. Add in the customers’ concern about viability of the poorly run company and you have a perfect storm for dismal sales. All this means is that anybody who really wants one of these is going to wait another six months and go for blood. Sales will remain stagnant because this is a purchase of desire, not need.
EDIT: One of the Dodge dealers in my community is a stereotypical “buy American” guy, complete with 46″ waist, gold jewelry, cigars, and open neck shirts. think Fat Elvis and you’ll get the picture…
Not one for being judgmental and prone to stereotyping- that’s refreshing. Come and see the deplorable lack of fitness of the typical Wall Street guy…
Nice retro-style commercial that will appeal to all us original musclecar geezers. Too bad all it succeeds in doing is reminding one of how much better looking the original E-body is than the current, bloated, reskinned-Charger, retro-version.
Likewise, I like how the guy in the Plum Crazy Challenger declines the invitation. He’s smart enough to know that fixing the drivetrain of one of those old Hemi E-bodies isn’t exactly a cheap proposition, especially if it’s something like a thrown rod.
More likely, the old car just isn’t running right (a common malady of the original Street Hemi with its dual quad carburation, constantly fouled plugs, and valve-lash adjustment requirments). In fact, I’m not sure the old car is running at all, and the puffs of exhaust smoke were digitally added to make it appear like it is.
That 1970 Challenger might even be a non-running, pre-production version Chrysler’s ad agency pulled out of a museum. At least it looks like one since I don’t think the production Challenger hood had the Dodge emblem. I’m not positive, but I think I only saw the ‘fratzog’ (a meaningless name coined by a Chrysler engineer) on the hood of a pre-production Challenger photo where it was specifically pointed out that the production versions didn’t have it.
Flashpoint
I paid $27,000 total for a Chrysler 300 2.7L with 22 inch chrome rims.
2.7L? Ugh. No offense, but WHY?
The only thing I see in the ad is a wizened old geezer having a laugh recalling that he was once like the impulsive young cat in the right lane.
@ Flashpoint
I am also hugely puzzled about $27k for a 2.7L 300 on 22s…you should’ve at least been able to swing a 3.5L for that, albeit with smaller rims.
N8iveVA you stole my thunder. Flashpoint said “I paid $27,000 total for a Chrysler 300 2.7L with 22 inch chrome rims.” I have an ’08 300C AWD. The 4,000lb 300 was meant to have the Hemi. Normally the exhaust note is refined & muted from inside the cabin, just enough so that you know there isn’t a V-6 under the hood. Nail the throttle and along with instant forward thrust comes the awesome V-8 roar through the gears. Chrysler has known for a long time that the 2.7 is a sludge engine. They wont fix it and won’t stop putting it in base level and fleet cars. Putting 22’s on a car designed for stock 17’s only changes the gear ratio for the worse making the car even slower. I marvel at all the interior room in the 300C. I just wouldn’t want all that bulk with a small DOHC V-6.
It’s no secret the new car market is in chaos.
The financial crisis has killed the market for virtually everything from hot muscle cars like the Challenger to formerly hot hybrids like the Prius. Even muscle mainstays like the Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Corvette are severely hurt.
Even with the weak market Chrysler has still managed to shift more Challengers per month since it was released than GM does Pontiac G8s last I checked.
IMO this is one of the few cars Chrysler does right. It’s really a shame the finacial crisis has hit right when it was released. It certainly doesn’t bode well for the upcoming Chevrolet Camaro after all the Camaro faithful (with money) get theirs.
The Challenger, along with the Camaro, epitomise absolutely everything that is wrong with the Big 2.5. I worked for Chrysler for many years and what the dealers were always SCREAMING for was a quality entry level product that could compete with the Corolla and Civic. What did the get? Well, we got the Gargantuan Durango and the plasticrap Caliber and its equally laughable Jeep clones. Finally, the topper was the Challenger. Really, how many of these things can Chrysler actually expect to sell? I have only seen ONE on the street here, which is deluged with Toyondas.
After my Chryco store went bust because it had no product to sell, I got a job at GM. Guess what? Same thing. The only way GM could move metal was by financing low brows. When that dried up, so did my store and we also didn’t have anything to compete with the Corolla and Civic. Don’t tell me a Cobalt is anywhere as good as these cars, it is not.
So bascially, GM and Ford have a bunch of old Geezers like Lutz trying to reinvent the past with horsepower and moxie.
Now let’s have a look at the evil foreigners. They still focus on cheap, reliable sedans that hold their value so they can be leased. A customer with a 700 FICO can get a Civic out the door for less than $200 a month and Honda is advertising that like crazy and the reason is so simple it is amazing how Detroit is so clueless: they are damned good cars. This is why people buy them. Gee, what is Honda’s big model for 2010? Well, the new Insight hybrid that will get 50mpg and sell for $20k and lease at $250 a month. What is GMs? Well, the new Camaro 6.2 litre at $40k and finance at $800 a month. What is wrong here, boys and girls?
So, yes, it is going to be a hard slog for all car makers but I would wager the company that can put a quality product on the road for $200 a month is going to do a lot better than one trying to flog muscle cars with fat profits (see business model, circa 1965) and then having to discount them so they lose money on every car.
Again, having worked in the domestic auto industry, it is completely beyond my comprehension that they could be so completely inept.
Canucknucklehead :, absolutely right. ANY effort dedicated these cars would be better spent improving their current products. As much as I like e-bodies, especially the 71 Cuda, the truth is they were flops. And yes the Hemi was troublesome. That’s why they are so scarce now…no one bought them. And history is repeating itself…right car, totally the wrong time.
These things will be subject to even steeper discounts in no time. And I still have grave doubts about whether the Camaro will make it.
Detroit-X:
“Handling? Ha. The numbers may be good, but how does it feel compared to say a GTI?”
The Challenger whips the GTI’s ass in every possible way. At Mid-Ohio, in an SRT-8 Challenger, I’d spot a GTI five seconds a lap, maybe seven. Even at an SCCA-National-Solo-style autocross, the Challenger will beat a GTI, because it can be turned on the throttle.
A better competitor for an SRT-8, if you like VAG products, is an S5. I was hoping to have a Challenger SRT-8 and an S5 in my driveway for all of 2009, but with my kid on the way it looks like that SRT-8 will be a Charger. Boo hiss!
As I said before, the Challenger and Camaro are P’s of S that wouldn’t even be here if it weren’t for Viagra-induced memories of frivolous youth long past.
There could not have been any serious market-research-based business case for these. At least not one that involved men under 50.
But the Lutz Generation of American auto-execs get wood when they remember being 18 and driving their Pony Car…so they built it.
Hey Canucknucklehead, don’t sell GM short. The Chevy Volt is coming. Maybe for 2010. Maybe 2011. Their not really sure. The technology isn’t completely invented yet. Other than the concept they rolled out for the auto shows the only thing they seem to have accomplished so far is to set the price- $40K. GM will never change. They show up for a gunfight and pull out…………absolutley nothing.
I miss the Magnum. Ghetto hearse that it was, at least one could assume a basic level of sales because it was somewhat practical, whereas the Challenger was doomed as soon as the retro market was tapped out.
Chrysler kills me. They can, on a good day, do more interesting work than just about any make, but the follow-through is never there. There’s cars like the Caravan, which for all it’s mechanical inferiority really shows a lot more “think” than the Sienna or Odyssey; the Journey manages the same, versus the CR-V or RAV/4. There’s the PT, which is about the perfect mix of stylish, economic and practical. Then there’s the LX cars, which have more stylistic flair in their front bumper than in all of General Motors’ products combined.
Of course, there’s also the Sebring, Caliber and Compass, which shows you that when Chrysler doesn’t try at all, the failure is epic. And even in their good products, the attention to detail just goes away: the minivan and Journey’s powertrains are such a letdown, the LX cars’ detailing is really subpar. On these cars it’s just heartbreaking, because you can see Chrysler is hitting the limits of their expertise.
I blame Daimler, I really do. They took the only American company that was actually making competitive product across the board, and making money doing so (seriously: the Neon and PT were actually profitable) and ran them right into the ground. Before Daimler, the quality was improving, the design was brilliant and the production was, well, it wasn’t the dollar-sink that GM was. After Daimler? The Sebring was the first model that was all-DCX engineered; the Caliber, Compass and Patriot were the next.
“The purpose of the exercise was to have a “halo” car, something new that would get people into showrooms to ultimately buy….anything.”
I see this nonsense about “halo cars” tossed out every time someone criticizes the Challenger or Camaro. Here’s the thing, this clever plan requires alternative products worthy of purchase. What’s the point of all the money spent on developing and building this if it’s there’s nothing to recommend anything else in the showroom?
You could argue that the minivans are worth buying and I wouldn’t argue that, but someone wanting a minivan doesn’t need to be lured in by the Challenger. In this regard, the halo car, as it is, is nothing more than a super expensive marketing stunt that has very little return for the money spent.
Chevy already has the Corvette.
Ford’s always had the Mustang, and the Ford GT for a few years as well.
Dodge has(had) the Viper.
Nissan has the GTR.
Where is Toyota’s halo car? (They don’t have one unless the Prius now holds that title)
Where is Subaru’s halo car? (it’s a beefed up model of an already decent, if ugly, compact)
Where is Mitsubishi’s halo car? (it’s the same as Subaru’s, but I’d argue that the Lancer is a nice enough looking car in standard trim)
Where is Mazda’s halo car? (again, they beef up their existing ones and slap Mazdaspeed badges on them)
Where is Honda’s halo car. (Did they ever even advertise the S2000? With that in mind, would it even count?)
I would argue that halo cars are either pointless, or are best represented as upgraded versions of existing models in a respective manufacturer’s lineup. The more important variable is for a manufacturer to have viable product in the showroom to begin with. Chrysler has compact and midsize offerings that are without a doubt completely uncompetitive in this market. Their RWD sedans are still somewhat unique, but have stagnated.
Anytime the idiot dealers get this ingenious idea to sell a car at MSRP + bonus money, you can guarantee that within a year the car will tank, usually big time.
@cardeveloper,
I think that the Miata and STi are two examples where the car was MSRP + at launch (decision of individual idiot dealers), but the car didn’t ultimately tank.
Perhaps a function of there being few enough dealers that Corporate could lasso up the cowboys in the bunch. Perhaps better cars with broad enough capabilities to survive past their launch.
Maybe a better indicator of a hyper-hyped car’s long term prospects is related to the amount of pre-launch hype. The more spent pre-launch, the worse the thing fares. Autoblog had Challenger this and Camaro that – on a daily basis – for months before those things were launched. I mean, by the time both came out we were all so familiar with seeing them that they already need(ed) a refresh.
I got my first close-up of the Challenger yesterday at the Houston Auto Show. While it has great styling, it is way too big. I also sat in the new Camaro (albeit a pre-production mock-up). I like the design of the car overall (except the tail lights), but the interior is horrible.
Finally, the new Mustang was there as well. It looks awesome in person (again, though, the tail lights are its weak point). I doubt the Mustang will lose its sales crown…..
Canucknucklehead, you actually have it exactly the opposite.
Cars like the Challenger and Camaro are what these companies are famously known for, what people actually want to buy from them and something only they can do. They should have never, ever stopped producing cars like this.
Not only that, but they should be used as templates for design, styling and performance that should be applied to every other product they make.
We already have “evil foreign” automakers here and making cars they are good at building and that people want to buy from them. American automakers are never going to win by trying to copy them. What American automakers need to do is produce cars that carry all the style, soul and performance that they are known for while applying it to the all types of vehicles. Making them unique and distinctly American.
The new Malibu is a shameless Asian copy, it blends in with everything on the road, there is nothing special about it and it doesn’t live up to it’s heritage or name. That very heritage and name should have been leveraged to inspire people at GM to make it a better car, a special car. Must like the new Camaro which does live up to it’s heritage and does sport the style of the original channeled into our time.
If all of GM’s vehicle still carried their historic namesakes and styling and were as well executed as the Camaro things would probably look better today.
Quick aside. Is it me, or do all these guy vs. guy, middle-of-the-night drag race ads have a homosexual subtext?
Nope
American automakers are never going to win by trying to copy them.
Actually, the American makers have completely given up trying to compete with off shore brands. The Challenger was never a financial success even in the 1970s heyday which is why it was axed so quickly. The whole idea of these cars was to get buyers in the showroom and sell them something they could afford and would suit a family. Now these models do not exist. Kind of a circular argument. The problem is blatantly obvious: none of the big 2,5 have a product to compete the Fit/Civic or the Yaris/Corolla. That is a huge chunk or market to surrender. It should never have been done.
The new Malibu is a shameless Asian copy
It is based in an Opel platform. It sells fairly well. So what is the problem here, Mr Spock?
But like I have said, the American makers and their fans are completely clueless, which is why GM and Chrysler only survive due to corporate welfare since brands like the Camaro and Challenger aren’t selling, either.
TriShield, if the American manufacturers adopted your strategy they would have to vastly contract their production capacities. Consumer demand for cars like the Challenger or Camaro is microscopic. The Detroit 3 copy strategies and products from the Asian manufacturers because these are the products that people are buying in meaningful quantities.
the American makers and their fans are completely clueless, which is why GM and Chrysler only survive due to corporate welfare…
When you make sweeping blanket statements like this, it is readily apparent who is clueless. My wife’s G35 was just rear ended and totalled. Now she drives a new CTS. The car, while not perfect, stands on its own merits. The deal was just better than Infiniti was willing to do. So she/we have gone from being a smart shopper to being clueless?
Too bad the insurance company wouldn’t pay out on all the suspension upgrades…
When you make sweeping blanket statements like this, it is readily apparent who is clueless.
Really, so, in an industry that is only being sustained by corporate welfare, are you suggesting that GM abandon the entry-mid level market and only build cars such as the CTS?
What would better return GM to financial health: A model to compete with the Fit/Civic and Yaris/Corolla or concentrate on CTS production?
The deal was just better than Infiniti was willing to do.
GM is discounting to move metal while Infiniti doesn’t have to. Who made a bigger profit?
@TriShield,
What did Chevy Make in 1975?
Let’s see…
Oh! There’s the Camaro. Hmmm. Halo car? That’s back – for a little while
What’s this? Caprice Classic – winner there.
And, Oh! The Nova! Wow!
What else? Vega and Cosworth Vega (Death and, sadly, Mega Death)
El Camino! (Hey! Chevy Killed it. Subaru tried it – twice. VW Tried it. Thank God they didn’t bring up the Monaro version of it).
What’s left? Monte Carlo. Chevelle SS (the American ricer car).
Citation (harbinger to the rise of Consumer Reports).
The Monza – which was a good car and raced really well.
And the Corvette (Chevy’s halo car).
So, the new Malibu is a good car – save the tarnished name. Chevy should keep the ‘Vette make Malibus and other cars people will buy and not look back – without doubt.
DrX, I did not say to build all muscle cars. I said that the same type of styling, heritage and attention to detail and performance present in legends like the Camaro and Challenger should be applied to all the products they build.
No different than BMW putting their heritage, style and enthusiast DNA in all the models they offer.
Instead, most of what American automakers squeeze out is horrendously bland or built by committee in all those respects. Most of what is present in their very best or most coveted vehicles is not present in the rest of their line. That has to change and it doesn’t mean making a Xerox copy of an Asian car.
I think if GM for example put the same amount of styling effort and attention into a car to compete with the Fit and Civic as they do the Camaro and Corvette they would be able to compete in those segments much better.
I predicted that Chrysler would eventually have to put a bunch of money on the hood of the Challenger to move it out the door. I just didn’t figure it would happen quite this quickly.
dgduris, try the 1950s and 1960s, the Chevrolets that people covet and fondly remember. The brand’s zenith.
Those are really the types of cars in styling and name they should be making today. Whether the new Malibu is also a truly good car can also be put up for debate. It’s must too Asian-looking and run of the mill to make the big splash GM really needs in it’s class.
American automakers have a proud heritage and history they can draw on to make new cars. Making cookie-cutter cars every generation with a new name nobody knows or cares about hasn’t worked since GM got into the habit 25 years ago and repeated it across all their brands.
@TriShield,
I don’t think the average car buyer these days remembers Chevrolets of the 1950’s or 1960’s – save the StingRay. Anyone who does….well, “Get off my lawn, you damn kids!” But Buick can’t save GM.
But you are right, badge engineering killed GM’s differentiation. Now-days there is really so little differentiation between all the volume cars. The Camry, Malibu, Fusion, Passat…there isn’t much between them in driving dynamics (snore), quality or dependability. So you have to make news where you can. Malibu is, by definition, “olds” and will never succeed – despite being on par with the competition.
There’s a reason why American brands won’t stop trying to copy the imports. Look at the styles that the critics at car magazines/sites like. You’ll see a pattern if you look enough. I can promise you the tastes of the critics do not favor domestics. The last I checked there’s no textbook right or wrong style for a vehicle, yet the majority of critics seem to all like the same types. So my advice to the domestic automakers would be: Don’t mimic the imports. Instead hire your harshest critics from every major car magazine and website (including the Best and Brightest!) and have them design a few vehicles. Then market the hell out of the fact that your cars are critic designed. I’m betting that most of the auto critic community at large wouldn’t cannabalize itself by giving a bad review for a multi-critic designed vehicle. Don’t be a victim of the Information (more like Opinionated) Age. Exploit it.
To those of you who think that GM, Ford, and Chrysler should go back to the glory days. Times are different. The world is a different place. Fuel is more expensive, the global automobile markets are far more dynamic and competitive. The domestic companies have had…errrr…how long to play catch up? Since the late 1970’s? Jeez.
I would love to see my old El Camino resurrected, but it ain’t happening and I am not longing for those days. Today is a different time and I would think the domestic car companies would have caught onto to this fact in the last 25 years…
In a related topic, I have a family member who is an original owner of a completely original ’69 HEMI Charger Daytona (with the nose and wing). Back in the day, dealers also had a hard time selling them and some resorted to removing the nose and the wing.
I’m not saying the Challenger is the same, but with the future mpg standards and environmentalists running things, we may never see a car like the current Challenger again. May not be a bad time to pick up an SRT and baby it for 20 years. Personally, I’m already thinking that I’ll regret the fact that I didn’t buy one.
If they put the needle nose and the wing on the SRT, heck, I might be interested- even with 4 doors! THAT was a great American car – along with the Mustang 3/4 Fastback and the suicide door Conti.
Airhen: “In a related topic, I have a family member who is an original owner of a completely original ‘69 HEMI Charger Daytona (with the nose and wing). Back in the day, dealers also had a hard time selling them and some resorted to removing the nose and the wing.”Actually, the 500 or so ’69 Daytonas that were built sold fairly quickly. Unfortunately, Chrysler found out that was just about the entire market for that type of car when they came out with the similiar (but not identical) Plymouth Superbird a year later.
It’s worth noting that the Superbird was built solely to get Richard Petty back to driving for Plymouth. Chrysler paid dearly for that privilege since it was the Superbird (not the Daytona) that Plymouth dealers had a difficult time selling.
And the legend of dealers removing Superbird nosecones to sell them probably comes from Maryland. That state did not recognize the end piece as a legitimate bumper (which it wasn’t). So, at least in Maryland, Superbird front-ends were converted over to standard Roadrunners.