A Dodge spokesperson reached out to confirm that the base Charger R/T will indeed be discontinued from the lineup, leaving the Scat Pack as the sole option in the electric Daytona range, at least for the 2026 model year.
Production of the Dodge Charger Daytona R/T is postponed for the 2026 model year as we continue to assess the effects of U.S. tariff policies,” the company told us in a statement. “The Charger’s flexible, multi-energy STLA Large platform allows us to focus on the Charger Daytona Scat Pack’s performance as the world’s quickest and most powerful muscle car, add the new four-door model to the Charger mix for the 2026 model year and lean into the new Charger SIXPACK models that will launch in the second half of the year.
According to a report from MoparInsiders, the Scat Pack variant will now lead the Daytona lineup, marking a significant pivot in Stellantis’ EV strategy.
Originally introduced with bold ambitions, the Charger Daytona R/T was designed to offer an accessible gateway into electric performance. With its 456-horsepower dual-motor setup and optional 509-horsepower Direct Connection stage kit, it seemed poised to excite both muscle car fans and EV newcomers. However, market realities have painted a different picture.
Industry and media reports highlight the core issue: buyers just weren’t biting. Despite its impressive specs and nostalgic design cues, the R/T struggled to justify its price tag, starting near $60,000. At that level, buyers expected either more performance or more premium features. Without strong sales traction, Dodge made the tough call to shelve the R/T variant for 2026, opting instead to focus on trims that resonate better with customers.
The goal was to retain Dodge’s brand identity—muscle, aggression, and driver engagement—even in the electric era.
The Charger Daytona R/T was supposed to be the perfect balance of price and performance, but it seems the target audience wasn’t ready to make that leap at that price.
Importantly, this doesn’t spell the end of the Charger Daytona altogether. Higher-performance models like the Scat Pack and Banshee are still in the pipeline and, interestingly, are being adjusted for price competitiveness. Several trims are reportedly seeing price cuts, suggesting Stellantis is serious about making these vehicles more appealing and accessible. For enthusiasts, the takeaway is clear: the electric muscle car isn’t going anywhere, but automakers are still figuring out how to sell it.
Worse, the core product just isn’t that compelling as an EV. It has middling range; software that’s a step behind most competitors, and two steps behind others; bad low-speed throttle tuning and so much weight to lug around. With a 0-60 time of 4.7 seconds, the R/T wasn’t even that quick by EV standards; It’d get dusted by a Tesla Model Y Dual Motor Long Range, hardly a muscle car. The R/T also started around $62,000, which is a helluva lot more than a V8 Mustang costs.
I don’t think Dodge is doomed here, and I think focusing on the high-horsepower model makes sense. Right now, an EV muscle car is unlikely to undercut its internal-combustion counterparts on cost, but it can deliver more power, more torque and use multiple motors to pull off clever tricks that an ICE car couldn’t. Dodge hasn’t quite leveraged those advantages into an ultra-compelling product yet, but sticking it out in the segment may teach it a lot of valuable lessons.
Unfortunately, the news is worse for Stellantis as a whole. The company has two long-range EVs on sale in the U.S.: The Dodge Charger Daytona and the Jeep Wagoneer S. In my view, both have tuning issues, and neither does enough to convince EV skeptics or traditional Dodge and Jeep buyers. Both are built outside of the U.S.—the Dodge in Canada, the Jeep in Mexico—so they’re now subject to tariffs on their already-high prices. Its city EV, the Fiat 500e, is in an equally tough position, with Kevin Williams proclaiming that he “doesn’t know who this car is for.”
The demise of the R/T is less a failure and more a recalibration—proof that even the boldest plans need to stay flexible in the face of consumer demand.
