Can you believe it’s been 19 months since Dodge first unveiled the new Charger? In that time, we’ve seen the electric variant get a somewhat icy reception, the four-door model promise practicality, the six-cylinder Scat Pack model add a dose of real intrigue, and now it’s time for the volume model. Order books for the six-cylinder Charger R/T are open, and Dodge has revealed some new information to go along with that. Unfortunately, if you’re the sort who loves flooring it down an on-ramp, the Charger R/T might not quite be your cup of tea.
Under the hood of the new Charger R/T sits the standard-output twin-turbocharged Hurricane inline-six, making 420 horsepower and 468 lb.-ft. of torque. That’s a decrease of 130 horsepower and 63 lb.-ft. of torque over the Scat Pack’s high-output Hurricane variant. For DIY-ers looking to turn up the wick, it’s worth noting that the new Charger R/T isn’t nerfed solely by calibration tweaks. The base combustion-powered Charger features smaller 50 mm turbochargers over the Scat Pack’s 54 mm turbos, and targets 22 PSI of boost compared to the Scat Pack’s 30 PSI. Further, it only features a single water-to-air charge cooler, and uses cast pistons instead of forged pistons.
With this entry-level engine hitched to an eight-speed automatic and all-wheel drive, Dodge claims a zero-to-60 mph time of five seconds flat and the quarter-mile in 13.6 seconds. While these would’ve been seriously impressive figures in 2005, the new combustion-powered Charger R/T seems to be starting on the back foot considering it’s a performance car. In fact, even with the benefit of an all-wheel-drive launch, it may be no quicker than its predecessor.
Back in 2019, Car And Driver ran a series of octane-related tests on a variety of cars including a 2019 Dodge Charger R/T with the 5.7-liter Hemi V8. While the old V8 Charger had a recommended octane of 89 AKI, the magazine managed acceleration figures of 4.9 seconds from zero to 60 mph and 13.4 seconds through the quarter-mile on regular 87 octane gasoline. Sure, that’s only a tenth of a second slower from zero to 60 mph and two tenths through the quarter, but between the octane deficit for the old car and the added traction for the new car, what gives?
Well, curb weight may play a factor. The old V8-powered Charger R/T carried a base curb weight of 4,270 pounds. Not exactly light, but an understandable amount for a full-sized rear-wheel-drive sedan with a V8. While Dodge hasn’t released a curb weight figure for the new Charger R/T, its high-output Scat Pack sibling tips the scales at 4,816 pounds. Smaller turbochargers and one fewer charge cooler are likely to reduce this figure, but touches like those alone won’t pull more than 500 pounds out of a car. In addition, launch control is optional on the R/T as part of the Performance Handling Group, and simply brake-boosting against the lockup torque converter without launch control may not yield optimal results. It’s also possible Dodge might be sandbagging slightly, although if that’s the case, why cross the five-second barrier?
Things start to get really disappointing when you take a step back and look for more context, however. Remember when Ford released the 2010 Mustang GT with the carryover 4.6-liter V8 then immediately shocked every 2010 owner by dropping in the vastly more powerful Coyote engine for 2011? Well, that 315-horsepower 4.6-liter V8 model should still keep up with a new Charger R/T. Fifteen years ago, Car And Driver pulled a zero-to-60 MPH time of 5.1 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 13.7 seconds out of this mildly disappointing Mustang. Meanwhile, across the Stellantis paddock, the four-cylinder Alfa Romeo Giulia ran a 4.6-second zero-to-60 MPH sprint and a 13.3-second quarter-mile in the hands of Car And Driver. Sure, it’s a much smaller car than the new Charger, but it’s down two cylinders and a turbo, and it starts roughly $6,000 cheaper than the new Charger R/T.
What’s more, the new Charger R/T is only $5,000 less expensive than the 540-horsepower Charger Scat Pack, which claims to run from zero to 60 mph in less than four seconds. Considering the expected bump in resale value that usually comes with a higher trim level, that’s a relatively small premium for such a substantial improvement in acceleration. And since you’re already spending $51,990 including freight on the R/T, spending an extra 9.6 percent on a Scat Pack seems like a more effective use of money than loading up on options, including the panoramic moonroof and blacked-out trim.
While the 2026 Dodge Charger R/T does promise to be a roomy family liftback, if you’re the sort of person who likes Dodge for the power on offer, you’ll want to spend the extra cash on the Scat Pack model. Shaving more than a second off the zero-to-60 mph time for $5,000 seems like solid value, and if you’re the type to hit up your local quarter-mile every now and then, you’ll probably want something that can decisively outrun a 15-year-old Mustang even if your reaction time is a few tenths off.
Top graphic image: Dodge
I think we spend all our time looking at this thing from the performance angle, and judging the price accordingly, but the size situation keeps getting ignored.
Now, I don’t like big vehicles, a 3,600lb car was too much for me, and I can’t fathom a 2.5-ton sedan, but I would never deny that big cars are expensive. And for those in the back, you don’t need to pull out your opera glasses, because this car is HUGE. Not just in weight, but in its actual dimensions. It has a huge hood, a huge cabin with huge doors and a huge liftback, so you get a huge opening to get your huge junk into that huge trunk.
That long hood and that big trunk mean you get lots of fore/aft crumple zone, making it measurably safer than smaller cars of similar capacity, all that width means you get your space without compromise, you can lay your arms out on deliberately-added armrests, not pads glued to recesses in your doors, which are thick for side-impact safety, and you can happily ferry your 15-year-old Varsity Volleyball kid to school in the backseat without any complaints, because the wheelbase is long, which also nets you better ride quality and dynamic stability.
If you want this amount of car at this price point, your alternatives are pretty much all SUV’s. If you want to guarantee a 0-60 faster than a GR86, it’s down to the Charger and the Explorer ST. The Explorer is on par with the Six-Pack in price, and the Charger offers sedan handling and styling, and doesn’t come with the Explorer’s (and former charger’s) unfixable “is that a cop?” defect.
The Charger has many flaws. Many, many flaws. But the price is right. I would never cross-shop this car with a Golf GTI, or with a Mustang, or even a CT4, because it’s too damn big. But if I was in the market for the legroom and safety of a full-size and wanted some spice, the Charger would be my favorite under-budget wildcard.
I agree with all this. Except that I still wouldn’t consider the Charger, because then people would mistake me for one of the Charger bros and I can’t have that.
You just articulated many of the reasons I bought mine!
I’m a big dude, so I like to have some space in my vehicle.
My wife and I don’t have kids, and both have desk jobs, so I don’t need a truck or an SUV.
In fact, I dislike SUVs, trucks, and minivans. I’ve never enjoyed the way any of the ones I’ve been in has felt to drive. Every car I’ve ever owned has been a coupe (90s Ford Thunderbird x2), full-size sedan, or wagon.
Entering my 40s, with the ability to move upmarket, and the agreement from my wife I could buy something I thought was cool, as long as it was a hybrid or EV, the Charger ticked a *lot* of boxes for me.
Won’t most R/T’s end up being sold with the police package to law enforcement? I’m Sure GSP for one are patiently waiting for the police spec Charger as they seem to be primarily a Dodge fleet except for a few recently acquired Mustang GT’s?
That’s insane. Is it made of concrete?
I jokingly refer to my Model S as the (famously ill-tempered battleship) USS Wisconsin because it weighs an absurd 4900lbs for a full size sedan. It at least has a weak excuse with its 1200lbs battery pack. The S is a bit smaller overall but that kind of heft for an ICE car is nuts.
The EV version is almost a thousand pounds heavier! Yeah, it’s a massive car.
Still less than a 1975 Cadillac DeVille.
I must have missed the important information everyone needs. Is that ne Charger 4 door model a coupe?
Both
I don’t think the performance is the big issue I would say it’s price. If you adjusted the last one with inflation it would still be under 50K. 60K seems like a bridge too far. At that point your getting to entry level luxury brands with faster cars like Cadillac CT5 V or a Acura TLX type S. Less horsepower mind you but similar performance.
Because larger sedans are rare it’s hard to compare. I mean a Toyota Crown starts in the mid 40’s. Is that a better comparison? I have no idea. I wonder how that discussion went inside Stellantis we offer the last non luxury fullsize sedan, ok lets price it like its a luxury car.
It’s not price, it’s demographics. Their base would not be caught dead in a Caddy or Acura.
Always nice to get the 10 year sneak preview of what’ll be on the buy-here-pay-here lot
“, it may be no quicker than its predecessor.”
Meh… the previous car was more than fast enough. If it achieves the same performance on 87 octane with better fuel economy, then it’s still a winner in my view.
I like the new model more than the old one for the hatchback alone.
Though I don’t understand why there is a big weight increase given it’s not a hybrid or a BEV.
And hopefully they come out with a lighter RWD version as not everyone needs AWD and people like me would rather do without the weight and efficiency penalty that AWD gives you.
The new Charger is larger in every dimension than the old Charger. It’s even slightly bigger than the old Challenger, though less so.
The extra size is going to come with extra weight.
Also, the ICE Charger requires some additional frame components the EV doesn’t, as the battery pack fills that role, although it’s still a net weight reduction over the EV model.
Finally, the chassis was designed from the start to be sturdy enough for future Hellcat/Banshee/Demon variants, unlike the old Charger/Challenger, which required some work to handle the higher-powered engines safely.
This is the issue with trying to build a car to do too many things, the same basic vehicle is supporting EV and ICE models and it does not seem to do well at either job. Seeing these in person they seem huge, the old car wasn’t small and the new one seems much larger when looked at side by side. I am unsure how interior volume compares between the two but this car is too heavy, to compromised, I am not surprised it is slower even with more power.
How can it be a Charger if it doesn’t have those dents in the doors?
Same way the old 1983-1987 models are Chargers. Because they said it is! Ha.
Sorry, $5000 for a second faster isn’t a bargain. $5000 is make or break for most people. In the real world it’s more than fast enough. A second could probably be saved by getting rid of the unnecessary awd.
The AWD is what will sell this car that has to compete with every crossover. AWD is what gets people to think that maybe they can live without the ride height of the SUV/crossover and not give up winter weather abilities. The 1 second 0-60 difference won’t swing the average buyer. For me, it would since I value the increase in speed which is why I went with the Performance Model Y over the standard dual motor AWD, the price difference was worth it to me for the increased acceleration and minor tweaks to the suspension and looks. I agree $5k is likely make or break for people, for what I typically finance, that is about an extra year of payments.
I agree that $5000 can break a lot of people, but if that’s the case, they absolutely should not be buying a $52,000 car.
I’m certainly concerned about the new Hurricane engine with 2 turbos – there are reports about issues in the Ram (of course everyone seems to have forgotten how to make engines these days). The over-complication of cars continues, which intentionally I believe, makes them disposable products even if they don’t last until the warranty expires.
Does anyone think these will last long as police vehicles?
I’ve always considered Chrysler to have died the minute the merger of equals happened; anything after that is just a mess. Suppliers hate dealing with Stellantis, when you try to squeeze every nickel out of a product (can’t squeeze pennies anymore) quality takes a hit.
Maybe we are headed for our own Cuba-vehicle market where a cottage industry pops up to keep older cars on the road
What issues? The Hurricane seems to be the diamond in the rough from Stellantis right now. Reliable and competitive.
I work with a dealer, and I’ve heard about more Hemi’s than Hurricane’s being replaced since the motor came out.
I think most people consider how loud the owners of the broken ones are rather than what happens. And I’d say that to dealer technician faces too, since many of them consider the Pentastar’s to be junk because they’re replacing their 50th Amazon engine this month, knowing fully well how well they’re taken care of….
Most of what I’ve come across lately suggests the Hurricane is a rare example of Stellantis getting something right
This is really splitting hairs for use on public roads. Pretty much anything that can do 0-60 in under 6 seconds is fast, but a car that can do it in 3 doesn’t get a chance to very often.
I can safely and responsibly do a 3 second 0-60 multiple times during my commute if I choose. 5 seconds is quick, but nothing to write home about. 4 seconds is definitely fast. $5000 well spent if that’s what you like.
Much as I am a defender of Mopar, that feels way too high a price to be impactful in the market. It feels like they are trying to press you up to the higher tier. But that strategy only works when you have THREE options. One base cheap price, then price the middle one so close to the big one, people go “Well, I want more than the minimum, but the other two options are so close in price I should just get the best one!”
So to make this even try to fly, they need to introduce a Pentastar version of this car for like $33K. Gotta get that bottom tier in there. Besides on the LM chassis, the pentastar was far and away the highest volume seller.
My bet is eventually we see a base version available with the turbo 4 from the Wrangler, rather than the Pentastar.
I’d bet on the all-new Hurricane T4 from the Grand Cherokee. Honestly, I really hope they pair that with a hybrid system in the LB platform.
That’s actually an interesting engine too….it’s more or less an inline 4 version of the Maserati Nettuno V6, which is a badass motor with some unique combustion wizardry going on. I think a lot of people got lost in the DURRRRR TURBO 4 CYLINDER BAD MUH V6 REEEEEEE discourse and didn’t read further on the new mill.
Would I put money on it being reliable? Of course not lol, but it’s definitely unique and interesting despite being the most over-hated engine type…not to mention way more interesting than the damn Pentastar, which more or less just exists. I’ve driven multiple cars powered by it and can absolutely confirm that the Pentestar is in fact an engine.
I’m pretty interested in the tech as well, it seems like it’ll have very competent performance, at least. Its presence in the Grand Cherokee shows Stellantis is betting big on it, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see it spread across the range throughout future update cycles.
I had completely forgotten about the Jeep turbo 4 actually. You are right. That seems much more likely.
LM? The Charger/Challenger/300 used LD, LC/LA, and LX chassis codes.
Batting a 1000 today aren’t I? Yes, LX is the generic code I’ve seen tossed around and I misremembered.
I was just confused myself when I saw it. Can’t expect everyone to remember everything!
The Dodge marketing guy really has it made. “Car doing burnouts.” Done. Next!
I’ve not seen a single new charger or challenger in the flesh yet, ev or gas. Flops-ville. Maybe finally Enterprise will have something other than Altima or Sonata rentals. OOH maybe my one-way rentals will finally be something other than white Malibu (which, honestly, is a very nice and efficient road trip car)
I’ve seen two, one with manufacturer plates that was on the Power Tour earlier this year, and one at a combined air & car show where the local CJDRF dealer set up a display
I’ve seen the EV a few times and honestly it’s a really attractive car
Agreed, it looks pretty good. Seen a few around Portland as EV adoption is high here. It is a big car for sure.
Every time I see one it takes me like a minute to register that I just saw one. I like a clean design, but the Charger is just boring.
I saw one in my neck of the south in that cool orange color. I like it.
I’ve seen two in total, both red EVs. Not bad looking, but what shocked me was the noise. I didn’t realize that thing “broadcast” the weird Fratzonic noise machine ALL THE TIME. I’m sure you can turn it off, but these guys didn’t and you heard this thing blasting down the highway even with our windows up. It was very “odd”.
You can turn the sound off (or in Dodge vernacular, activate “Stealth mode”).
My wife does every time she drives mine.
It’s also likely the ones you saw were running in Sport mode, which is quite a bit louder than Auto (Sport mode also unlocks an additional 40 HP, turns off the traction control, and locks brake regen at level 2, for some reason).
Good to know. I assumed it could be turned off, but these guys definitely had it cranked up. My son even tried to get a video because it was the first one we had seen (back in April).
Same. Not a single one in the Boston area. And, they are not even attractive to the rental fleets, which is how most people in the area see domestic models outside of large SUVs and trucks.
On one hand, I don’t think this is that big of a deal. The R/T hasn’t been the fire breathing variant of a Mopar in a very long time. It’s always existed as the entry level to the full experience. With the last gen Charger/Challenger you had the rental spec version that gave you the look and nothing else, the RT version that gave you the look and the most basic and mass produced V8 on offer, and then you went up to the Scat Pack and Hellcat for increasingly more unhinged versions.
This isn’t really meant to give you the most this car can offer, it’s just meant to give you a more affordable entry point for what the car is supposed to be and like 80% of the experience. In that capacity I don’t think this is a huge deal because the prior gen R/Ts weren’t speed demons or track cars. They literally existed to make V8 noises loudly and give you a little spice when you wanted it.
Hell I’ve said for years that I thought the R/T was the sweet spot for the LX platform cars. It’s enough power and sound to have a great time with but not really enough to get you in too much trouble. You can flog one on public roads without losing your license, which is a lot harder to do with the Scat Packs and of course the Hellcats. So in a vacuum this seems fine to me.
…but we aren’t in a vacuum and to me this more or less looks like a ploy to upsell people the Scat Pack. It’s nerfed in several notable ways. The first is price…and this would basically be paying $50,000+ for similar performance to a GRC, GTI, Elantra N, etc. Hell you can get a lower spec Z or danger to yourself and others Mustang GT for nearly 10 grand less.
That’s a really poor value no matter how you slice it…and something else to note is Dodge is not offering the performance exhaust or some of the other go fast goodies the Scat Pack gets on the R/T. The Hurricane actually sounds pretty damn good with an exhaust, but in its stock set up? It doesn’t sound like much of anything. Obviously the aftermarket can fix that but a good exhaust system is practically going to put you in Scat Pack price range anyway.
I imagine the R/T will be discontinued within a year or two to be honest, especially with Stellantis’ fast and loose financing. The average Kyle trying to use his enlistment bonus to get a Charger might be fine with the R/T, but through the magic of the financing they totally don’t have specifically for guys like Kyle suddenly that Scat Pack is only another $40 per month, so why wouldn’t he go for it? The R/T is way slower and doesn’t sound very sporty anyway!
We see you, Dodge….
Remember the Stratus R/T? Pepperidge Farms remembers
I try not to
Stellantis is banking on Mopar nostalgia. Nothing more
I’ll have mine as a penta starred SE model, please!
My experience with seeing older Dodge Chargers attempting to out-accelerate people on the road: it doesn’t matter if it’s a V6, V8, Scatpack, or RT – all that matters is that the owner tinted the windows.
Heck, it could be two Dodge-Neons in a Charger-shaped trenchcoat.
I wonder what the real sales breakdowns were for Chargers in their heyday, and if people just wanted to see that it had dual exhaust.
In the 60’s they sold a lot more 383 Chargers than 440s or 426 Hemis. I don’t think the slant 6 was available in it- the Coronet body (same size) had that offered.
Actually you could get the slant 6… but few ordered it. I suspect the most popular engine was the 318 LA V8.
https://www.automobile-catalog.com/production/dodge/charger_2gen.html
Surprising, but interesting. I guess Joe Dirt’s slant 6 superbird could be real!
How do you define ‘heyday’? I would argue that the last gen Charger was its Heyday.
And on the previous gen, the majority of Chargers sold had the V6.
For most people buying it, the performance is more than fine . . . at around $40k.
I’m sure these wont sell for MSRP anyway.
For most people buying it, the only figure they’ll remember is zero down and some monthly number for 84 months (I can’t guess the APR or how far underwater their trade-in is).
Needs a supercharged Hemi tuned to 1,000+ horsepower, to be rebadged as the next Hellcat.
On the Mustang front, it actually reminds me of 1996, when Ford swapped out the OG 5.0 for the then-new 4.6.
I think the 4.6 actually made the exact same power, but the power band was smoothed out more, in contrast with the 5.0’s all at the low end setup. It felt slower off the line, and for most buyers, that’s what mattered.
I owned a 96 gt with the 4.6 and while it was rated at the same 215 hp as the 5.0 it revved much quicker. Where the real difference was though was between the 95 to 96 cobras. I believe the 95 was rated at 245 while the 96 was 305. A 60hp jump in what was essentially the same car otherwise was just crazy to me.
oofta may, did they leave the batteries in that thing after yanking the digicles?
honestly though, if you live anywhere is might snow, and cannot park your 500 hp scatty or even your 300 hp Penta with just RWD, then you should know how terrible these cars are in the snow. even the Scats have a hard time actually getting the cars to hook up on Dry pavement, that is kind of why so many demand a roll race to prove their manliness I suppose. The AWD is likely the weight penalty here, but I imagine if itis close enough to the same while being genuinely more effective all season, then it should sell better then the EV at least. though that is not a tall hurdle.
Wild to be living in a time period where a 5 sec 0-60 and “slower” is used in the same sentence.
Esp given the corresponding drop in many driver’s skill and even willing attention to the task at hand.
I figured the new R/T wouldn’t be blisteringly quick, but that’s embarrassingly slow for what they cost. Stellantis continues to play to it’s highest strengths, terrifying recalls, aimless product planning, and horribly overpriced vehicles.
Have you cross shopped lately? Recalls are the name of the game for Ford and GM and even Toyota quite a lot these days. prices are not dropping either. F150 Work trucks in the mid 40k range is actually cheap for whatever reasons.
I will be the first to bash Ford and GM for their recalls, but Stellantis is particularly special for their 4Xe recalls. Recall of a recall of a recall for the battery fires AND a recall for the turbo-4 in those hybrids also catching fire. That’s a special level of horrifying. All on a 70k Jeep that will lose half it’s value in under 2 years. Groundbreaking levels of terrible products.
agreed, the 4Xe had so much potential and that now is showing it’s reality. though I do recall the base 4Xe sahara going under but closer to 60k Rubicons are pricy regardless.
Honda’s recalling over 1/4 million cars for software issues and almost half a million for defective lug nuts
Such a shame that institutional self-loathing seems to have gimped an otherwise beautiful car.
THIS!
The new Charger is an objectively good-looking vehicle. The fucknuttery at Chrysler makes it seem like they’ve got an interest in tanking it for some reason.
This will be a sought-after model when Dodge is extinct.