Not Your Father's Fleet Vehicle—Is It?
Collingswood P.D. Lieutenant Dana Saxton has an appreciation for the borough's new police pursuit vehicle on many levels.
Photos
Collingswood Police Lt. Dana Saxton describes himself as a backyard mechanic who grew up with Corvettes, GTOs and other American muscle cars.
He’s not a thrill junkie—he’s not shy of the gas pedal either—but confessed a certain fondness for the newer Dodge Charger Pursuit police vehicles that Collingswood P.D. has rolled out in recent months.
Call it nostalgia; call it an incurable gear-head streak. As a law enforcement officer and auto enthusiast, it’s got to be fun to think that the latest incarnation of the General Lee is working for the other side.
But even if everything old is new again, these fleet vehicles aren’t exactly whistling “Dixie.” For one thing, they’re far shorter and lighter than their 1966 counterparts and get much better gas mileage.
Like their predecessors, however, the Pursuit Charger still has plenty of giddy-up. Powered by a 340-horsepower V8 Hemi engine, the car tops out at about 146 miles per hour, but with tires and suspension that enable smoother handling.
“For a 4,000-pound car, those are heavy-hitter numbers,” Saxton said.
The cruiser contains several built-in traffic safety features, including an LED light rack and push bar, as well as a full complement of policing necessities, like a computer terminal that offers on-board intelligence on warrants and other violations.
In the trunk, there’s a full-sized spare tire, a length of rope, road flares, and a first aid kit. All told, and including the computer equipment, which bears an additional cost, the state bid price for such a fleet vehicle comes in around $32,000.
Having new gear is great, and Saxton said the squad is “always concerned once it gets a ding”—which is why he and the staff at the borough garage do what they can to turn as many of their own wrenches as possible.
“That’s your office for 12 hours,” he said.
Keeping as much of the maintenance in-house also allows the department to preempt a lot of problems, sorting out little noises before they devolve into bigger problems. Of course, Saxton is careful not to oversell himself.
“I’m a step up from Jiffy Lube,” he laughed. “We can’t do the transmission or the computer. We can do tires, lube, pump leaks; I can play with the diagnostics.
“Then that big [repair] comes in that they didn’t expect, you saved,” he said.
The Collingswood Patch
Valentine's Shopping Guide
See the full guide!
Patch Picks
In This article
-
Collingswood Borough Police Department
735 Atlantic Ave, Collingswood, NJ
Collingswoodnative
8:32 am on Thursday, January 3, 2013
"...the Pursuit Charger still has plenty of giddy-up. Powered by a 340-horsepower V8 Hemi engine, the car tops out at about 146 miles per hour..."
Excuse me? This is exactly what Collingswood needs with 25 mph roads.
One more good reason for a regional police force.
redrum
9:25 am on Thursday, January 3, 2013
@ Collsnative While on 1 hand I agree a high-speed car is not necessary for ALL enforcement in town; sometimes that extra speed is needed - they do chase people, and the they do respond to other towns to assist. So don't rule out roads like Route 130, WHP, BHP, Cuthbert Blvd, etc. As for the regional police thingee; maybe Colls PD was thinking ahead - if that occurs, they will NOT be responding from the Colls Police Station, as it would be closed - so then they will need that high-speed car to get here from where ever the regionalized station would be. What "kills" me is the use of these $32,000 vehicles as mere flashing lights at construction sites - V8 Hemi's use ALOT of gas. Never understood having cops doing nothing; but if I were a cop I would love all that overtime !!!!! :)
Collingswoodnative
10:55 am on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Redrum a high speed chase on Rt 130 or other roads many times results in the death of a third uninvolved person. The police have radios in addition to the cell phones that are glued to their ears. Perhaps we can agree to disagree on this point.
As far as police sitting in the car in a construction zone, we are together on this point. My understanding is "it doesn't cost the taxpayers anything because the cost is paid by the company doing the work." This is wonderful if you believe in the tooth fairy, Santa etc. The cost is passed on by way of higher utility bills and roads.
I don't disagree with having protection for the workers on many roads however, barrier trucks behind the workers is a start. This protection is not passed along to our local Collingswood Utility workers. While out walking along Knight Park one day I encountered two workers on Park Ave. just off Collings dodging traffic while working in the middle of the street. I asked them about protection and was told they don't get any, only paying customers.
I recomended they stop working and get a dump truck to protect themselves, they had a pickup by the side of the road. They didn't and lucky for they no one was hurt.
redrum
3:57 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
silly me, you and I both forgot what they need that speed for - faster delivery time for donuts LOL
MAJ-13
11:21 am on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Well this is jaw dropping. As a close friend of some CPD employees, I've heard of their fears/concerns of downsizing and job loss, and in these crucial times where people's families and livelihoods are on the line I want to commend the person (people) who issued the solution of $32,000 cars that top off at 146mph...I guess the old Crown Vics that probably topped off at around 105mph just weren't cutting it...most high speed pursuits result in accidental/wrongful death, and of those deaths they are generally of someone whom wasn't involved in the chase to begin with...it's refreshing to see that the powers that be put on their thinking caps and opted for faster, more high powered vehicles...kudos
redrum
1:28 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
well, the do look alot cooler than the crown vics, LOL
Matt Skoufalos
4:05 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
I spoke with Mayor Maley on the subject of the cost of these vehicles, and to confirm, the cruisers—there are two of them—are under lease. They were not purchased outright, nor did they require a supplement to the existing municipal budget to acquire.
MAJ-13
6:05 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Another reason why Patch is awesome...thanks Matt...although I still don't agree with the "need" for these cruisers, it's nice to know that you follow up on what's posted for the facts...much appreciated, thanks again...
Matt Skoufalos
8:38 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Appreciate the kind words. Here, if you want to see a side-by-side look at the Chargers with the other Interceptors (and the Crown Vics), there's a chart about halfway down this page:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1210_chevrolet_9c3_detective_caprice_vs_dodge_charger_pursuit_vs_ford_police_interceptor/viewall.html
From what it looks like to me, they're all not great on gas, but the Charger is 2 mpg better than the '08 Vic (the last model year) and at the least comparable to the others in its class. That's from Motor Trend; feel free to pick your own standard of judgment.
Collingswoodnative
5:22 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Matt that sounds very nice but perhaps they could have saved some money for next year rather than using up all in the budget for the year.
Purchase or lease was not a question that I saw, why a car that can hit 142mph is.
sincerely
Struggling Colls Taxpayer
Matt Skoufalos
8:35 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Well, you're getting more money back on the school bond re-fi than you would have on the cost of two leased vehicles, if you want to look at it that way. And as far as I know, the $34 the schools carved out of their budget for 2012 still offset a $20 average household tax increase while the borough fixes up its infrastructure:
http://collingswood.going.com/articles/borough-approves-2012-municipal-budget-taxes-up
Peeches
10:00 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Matt, wondering who your employer is? Sometimes your editorials sound like it's Mayor Maley.
Matt Skoufalos
10:06 pm on Thursday, January 3, 2013
Haven't written an editorial in a while, Peeches, but thanks for a completely unfounded criticism.