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
>> What-A-Joke-Dodge << collapse of storied brand . Makes me naucious reflecting on my 35+ yrs w co. The Tech Center is a ghost town.
Having owned one of the last civilian 2015 Charger R/T AWD cars I bought new. That was the best car I ever owned bar none. The only reason why I traded it in was my wife was concerned it made me look like a cop, being all black. It was great on the highway, pulling up to left lane campers that would pull over as soon as they noticed what looked like a cop. Plus very few cars pulled out in front of me. But I got 18-23 mpg, was fantastic in snow, and took off like a scalded cat! Easily pulling 392’s to 50 mph, while their tires went up in smoke.
The cast pistons really are a dick move. It seems like they put those in there just so buyers couldn’t reliably and easily upgrade to the higher spec.
Any modern TT I6 in a performance car should have a long block that can handle upwards of 1000hp, like they used to do 30 years ago.
And 4800 pounds for a performance car? Theses guys got in way too deep before realizing the monstrosity they were creating.
I feel like Stellantis is boycotting their own business so they can get a government bailout, which of course would result in outrageous executive bonuses.
The premise of this article seems like a bit of a stretch. Those performance stats are still plenty fast. As stated, years ago, those numbers would’ve been eye popping. Today, theyre still competitive. Now, is it worth it for the savings over the high output version? Maybe not to the jet set lifestyle Autopian staff. But $5k is still $5k for those living on a paycheck.
Agreed. I wouldn’t have a problem with those numbers at all. Cast pistons, though…
Comparing a C&D 0-60 to a manufacturer 0-60 was not worth an article
You’re comparing peak boost after mentioning that the two hurricane engines feature a different quantity of charge air coolers.
Boost means very little when comparing engines with different restriction curves. Boost is just easier to measure than mass air flow rate, which is a more useful comparison.
The 15 year old Mustang might also be more reliable. The 4.6 is pretty good and Stellantis has a reputation. We will find out how good the hurricane is in a few years.
Depends on how you end up on the gamble of the 3-valve mod motors’ cam phasers. The older 2 valves are famously reliable (sometimes spitting spark plugs aside), but underwhelming for performance unless you’re prepared to force feed them air.
agreed, although the cam phasers seem to be a much less frequent issue on the 4.6 3V. And I’m aware there were revised parts for the 2010MY compared to let’s say a 2005MY. Cam phasers, timing chain tensioners, spark plugs and even the heads were revised around 2008.
I think Dodge pricing is done exclusively by looking only at other Dodge products. Someone looked at the pricing of the Dodge Hornet and said it has to be worth more than *that*. This a $52k Charger R/T.
New performance cars don’t always have to faster, that kind of thinking is what got us to a bunch of soulless, expensive, boring, rocket ships you can’t go more than quarter throttle with on a public road. But if you’re going to make a slow Charger for the credit score impaired just slap the Pentastar V6 back in it and call it a day.
They don’t HAVE to be faster, but it is really dependent on the car. I have a sports sedan with similar performance numbers as the R/T here (fewer ponies but a tick faster). It honestly has more than enough power for any driving I’d ever do, outside of a long straight on a track where you’d be pushing 100+. So no, this new R/T being a hair slower is really not a big deal.
BUT… this is a Dodge. The entire point of this car existing is for people to smoke tires and get to the next stop light faster than anyone else. Do you think a Dodge shopper is going to want to get the new model if the old Hemi is faster?
A Dodge shopper isn’t going to want it period without a hemi is my guess, haha!
This seems overblown to me. If this was the Hellcat replacement, there’s reason for concern. But isn’t R/T just a single step above base these days?
R/T is base these days
Darn. For all those times I’m either trying to break my 0-60 record or 1/4 mile ET times.
Auto testing is some of the dumbest crap for a product that 99.9 percent of owners will never be using test equipment to verify vs simple seat of the pants feeling. And the vast majority of them just want a spirited daily that won’t fall apart before the loan is paid off.
Hit it with the shrink-ray.
A 7/8th scale of this car would be awesome.
at 3/4 of the weight, pleasee
if length/height/width are 7/8 scale, mass will be 343/512, or about 2/3.
Performance, don’t care, price, for an overweight dodge. No thanks.
I think the 0-60 times don’t mean what they used to. So it’s probably ok if they put less focus on it.
With the proliferation of heavy, AWD EVs, there are a slew of family crossovers roaming around with 0-60 times that will make a motor head cry. My chonky, unsporting EV crossover rips off 4 second 0-60s anytime I find enough space to do it. Dodge is wiser to focus on the visceral aspects. Sounds, smells, looks. 0-60 wars are no place for a RWD gasser, unless you’re spending a vacation home’s worth of dollars.