This article will highlight some industry information that ordinary consumers may not easily notice, in order to provide a holistic big picture of the direction of internal combustion vehicles in the U.S. market. From this, you will understand whether the HEMI V8 will return for Stellantis, on which models it might reappear, how long such a return might last, and ultimately, the prospects and destiny of this (Gen 3) HEMI generation. You do not need to rely on rumors, because with the facts provided here, you can make your own judgments. Any corporate product decision must comply with fixed policies and regulations – they all must operate within the framework of law, so many things can be predicted from the existing law and regulation. Once you grasp the information in this article, you will realize that what happens in the coming months or years will align remarkably with these assessments.
Background
In recent years, consumers have noticed some puzzling developments with this generation of HEMI V8 engines:
- Former Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares seemed to rush aggressively to phase out HEMI V8s, removing them from vehicles like the Ram 1500, Jeep Grand Cherokee, and Wagoneer, replacing them with the new Hurricane I6.
- He strongly pushed EVs, making the new Dodge Charger initially EV-only.
- Even after his departure, with leadership more lenient toward V8s, and despite strong fan demand plus the low R&D cost of reusing the existing HEMI, Stellantis still chose the Hurricane I6 for the new gasoline Charger instead of the HEMI.
- There are rumors that Chrysler may revive the 300, but likely as an EV. Charger EV sales are poor, yet Stellantis seems intent on repeating this path.
So is Stellantis’ leadership really clueless about the US market? Did Carlos Tavares truly despise the V8, naively letting that show in his decision-making? Was he too shortsighted to foresee the backlash from abruptly killing V8s? Didn’t he realize this could endanger his CEO role? Stellantis is a publicly traded company worth tens of billions of dollars, and the U.S. is one of the largest auto markets in the world. So, could Stellantis really be foolish enough to hire a CEO who does not understand the U.S. market? If it were as simple as some so-called YouTube influencers claiming they “know cars”, then why don’t those YouTubers just go apply to be Stellantis’ CEO? Look at those YouTubers who spend all day making noise with Mopar-related content—how much ad revenue do their videos really make? And how much does a Stellantis CEO make? If someone truly had the ability and talent, would they really pass up the chance to earn hundreds of times more as CEO, just to keep making money by posting false, sensationalized content on YouTube?
And beyond Stellantis:
- GM plans to revive the Camaro, but only as an EV (like Ford’s Mustang Mach-E), risking alienating its core buyer base. With the Charger EV flop as a warning, why would GM still do this?
- GM invested $888M to develop a new-generation V8, scheduled for 2027. Why specifically 2027?
- Mercedes has also confirmed that a newly developed V8 engine is planned for release in 2027. The question remains: why 2027?
Industry Situations
First, a common misconception repeated by some YouTube and social media car influencers: that Trump-era policy “loosened” emissions rules, allowing carmakers to freely reintroduce big V8/V10/V12 engines. This is completely wrong. Federal emission standards have not regressed- they have only grown stricter. No automaker in the US will be able to mass-produce today’s style of large V8s in the future. Instead, we will see more 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder turbos, or EVs. To understand this, you must consider Trump-era changes, PLUS ALL EPA rules to see the full picture.
For example although there are below recent changes to the regulations:
- Section 40006 of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” removed financial penalties for failing CAFE fuel economy.
- The Congressional Review Act (CRA) restricted CARB (California) from stricter standards (though California ignored this).
But – federal emissions rules remain. Specifically: EPA’s Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles. This remains untouched and will be enforced. The focus is on toxic pollutants, not fuel economy. Non-compliance means severe penalties. Historically, US toxic emission standards have never loosened. Trump targeted greenhouse gases, NOT toxic gases – the two are different areas.
In short: only a few highly visible standards were loosened. Most emissions rules have always grown stricter. Globally too, rules tighten continuously. So automakers must improve powertrains or exit the business. Even under Trump, the overall direction remained stricter regulation.
The EPA’s 2027 regulation is not some unattainable requirement. For example, Ford had already met the EPA 2027 target for the NMOG + NOx metric as early as 2023. In contrast, Stellantis has fallen far behind in emissions because it relied too heavily on the HEMI V8 for marketing while failing to innovate. Obviously, the EPA is not going to revise long-established regulations just because one automaker has been lazy. Therefore, this crisis at Stellantis is bound to erupt, and judging by the EPA requirements listed below, it is inevitable that within the next 2–3 years the company will experience a domino-style collapse.
Another misconception: ignoring CARB rules or mpg standards will “free” V8s. This is completely wrong. EPA still imposes its own tightening rules. CARB just accelerates the crisis; outside California, automakers only get an extra year or two.
In fact, Stellantis had already made it clear in this document submitted to the EPA that under the new 2027 regulation, the only way for the company to meet the requirements on time is to drastically cut sales of high-polluting engines while significantly increasing sales of electric vehicles. Therefore, if Stellantis does not urgently ramp up sales of new engines such as the Hurricane, along with its EV sales, and instead continues relying on its existing older models and the HEMI V8, it may earn some quick profits over the next two to three years, but will soon fall into a death spiral.
See below examples for the EPA requirements:
EPA 2027 Standards
Key targets (fleet-average NMOG + NOx, mg/mile):
| Year | Standard (mg/mile) |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 51 |
| 2023 | 44 |
| 2024 | 37 |
| 2025 | 30 |
| 2026 | 30 (carryover) |
| 2027 | 25 |
| 2028 | 23 |
| 2029 | 21 |
| 2030 | 19 |
| 2031 | 17 |
| 2032+ | 15 |
By comparison:
- 5.7L V8 in Charger/Challenger/300 → LEV125 rating (70–125 mg/mile).
- 6.4L and 6.2L supercharged V8 → LEV160 (125–160 mg/mile).
These far exceed new limits.
From 2025, fleet averages must ≤30 mg/mile. That means Stellantis must sell large volumes of SULEV30-rated engines: 3.6L Pentastar V6, 3.0L Hurricane I6, 2.0L GME I4, or EVs.
This explains why Stellantis phased out V8s and pushed the Hurricane.
The Particulate Matter (PM) Rule
EPA also mandates PM ≤0.5 mg/mile by 2030:
- 2027: 40% of fleet must comply
- 2028: 60%
- 2029: 80%
- 2030+: 100%
This requirement is mandatory and not a fleet-average metric. It is a strict, vehicle-level limit, meaning by 2030, every individual vehicle must comply. Credits cannot be used to offset it for light-duty and medium-duty vehicles. Stellantis cannot circumvent this through the usual “buy credits, pay penalties” approach.
But HEMI V8s emit:
- 5.7L → 1–3 mg/mile
- 6.4/6.2L → 3–5 mg/mile
Way above the 0.5 mg/mile limit. Only SULEV30 or EVs qualify.
Thus Stellantis must push Hurricane I6 and other clean engines. Retrofitting V8s to meet these standards is likely either technologically impossible or prohibitively costly.
GM’s decision confirms this: only its 5.3L V8 meets SULEV30. So GM is developing a new V8 for 2027. Same situation for Mercedes as well.
Conclusion on HEMI
For the HEMI V8 to survive post-2027, Stellantis would need a major redesign – essentially a new engine family. Given Stellantis’ financial situation, customer base, and the performance of new Hurricanes, this may not be the optimal path. Even if a new high-output V8 were made, would it really bring profit? Hellcat succeeded in 2015 – but can the same trick work again a decade later?
Furthermore, will there ever be a road-legal, EPA-compliant 426 HEMI in its current form? The answer becomes obvious when you consider two simple questions: (1) Is it already EPA compliant? (2). If there were truly an easy, straightforward way to make it compliant, why wouldn’t Stellantis use the same method to bring the existing 5.7, 6.4, and 6.2 HEMI engines into line with future EPA standards—instead of investing in the development of an entirely new family of turbocharged Hurricane inline-six engines?
So likely Stellantis’ playbook will be:
- Sell current HEMI V8s for a few more years while possible – minimal cost, quick profit, but all discontinued by 2029–2030.
- Even during this window, volumes will be limited, with reliance on credits (penalties).
- Accelerate development of Hurricane, GME turbos, and hybrids to cover HEMI’s output while meeting new standards.
- Keep pushing EVs – yes, even after Charger EV’s flop. By 2032, fleet average NMOG + NOx must be 15 mg/mile, while Stellantis’ best current gas engines are at 30 mg/mile. Without EVs to balance averages, compliance is impossible.
- For a brand-new platform or model generation, if R&D investment is required for the gasoline-powered version, Stellantis will prioritize engines with lower emissions, such as SULEV30-rated options (e.g., Hurricane, GME, or hybrid). This is exactly what we have seen with the new Charger Sixpack. In general, the strategy is clear:
- Minimize costs whenever possible
- If spending is necessary, direct it toward areas that support compliance with the 2027 EPA regulations
