hate to put a damper on this but...

Let us remember this latest Bowling Green massacre.

1966 Ferrari 330 GT 2+2 Speciale by Carrozzeria. The rear is even more WTF.

Factually incorrect.

Requirements? At an FCA dealer? I not even sure “Having the money” is all that important.

Not with the current testing, we weren’t. Not with the current emissions requirements, we weren’t. Not with the current safety standards(or anything even remotely close to it), we weren’t. Low-hanging fruit aren’t so low-hanging anymore. The fact that today’s car’s already get better mileage than the cars of yore…

That is like the first fish with legs of the crossover breed.

This list is wrong because it’s lacking:

That is 100% not what power and torque look like plotted together on the same graph. It’s hand drawn. I’m an automotive engineer and have looked at way too many power/torque vs. time graphs.

Neutral: Remember when everyone said “will Audi ever be able to catch up to BMW and Mercedes?” and it took 2-3 decades of struggling by one of the most powerful multinational carmakers on earth to finally build some momentum and achieve near-parity (but not quite)? Yeah, it’ll be like that, but a lot less reliable and…

I think the license plate are torque numbers. Here’s why:

Simple...people buy what they want, not what they need.

Racer did a great feature on the Cadillacy nature of the car with Jordan Taylor.

The @35 refers to “at 35 [years old]”... to commemorate the introduction of the first great Charger, the FWD L body, 35 years ago.

A mid-engine supercar with a 3.5l twin-turbo V6 and a top speed of about 217 mph?