 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 2000-06 Chrysler/Dodge Neon |
 |
Much of this material is provided courtesy of the friendly folks at Chrysler, who also provided the photographs. Photos of the burgundy Neon are Allpar's.
Key Neon links here at Allpar |
|
|---|---|
| Neon SRT-4 | Neon racing successes |
| Performance | Neon owners' forum |
| First-generation Neon | Neon sales tips for Chrysler |
| Engines: 2.4 liter | 2.0 liter | 1.6 liter | 1.8 liter | |
The Neon has been replaced by the Dodge Caliber.
Not many updates were made in 2004. The SRT-4 got a new computer for a wider torque range, revised power (230 hp / 172 kW at 5,300 rpm and 250 lb-ft / 339 Nm of torque from 2,200 to 4,400 rpm), as well as a new torque-sensing limited-slip differential as standard equipment. BF Goodrich KDW2 three-season tires and bright metal pedal pads were added, and an optional sun roof package became available, and electric blue replaced solar yellow paint. The SE, SXT, and R/T models only had the addition of midnight blue paint.
European version of the Chrysler Neon. |
 |
Model lineup starts with the SE, then SXT (replacing ES), then R/T. The ACR is gone, with the SRT-4 in its place.2002 saw a four-speed automatic - presumably because the cost of keeping the three-speed automatic going for a single car were simply not worth it. Competitively, the Neon has also always been knocked in reviews for the three speed. The four speed does not seem to have improved gas mileage, and gearing can best be described as "not well thought out." (This changed in 2003.)
Additionally, the 2002 Neon has an optional five year, 60,000 mile warranty as part of a "security package," and a standard seven year, 100,000 mile powertrain warranty.
In the UK, Chrysler wrote: "The five speed manual transmission version returns 44.8 mpg on the extra urban cycle and 35.3 mpg on the combined cycle, due in part to the lower idle speed (30.7 mpg combined cycle and 39.8 mpg extra urban for the automatic). Performance is lively, with a top speed of 124 mph and a 0-62 mph time of 10.8 seconds for the five speed manual, and 114 mph top speed and 0-62 mph in 12 seconds for the automatic." Admittedly these are Imperial gallons so if we do the conversion, we have about 35 mpg highway, 28 combined - at the cost of 2 seconds, zero to sixty. That's not a great improvement on the domestic which gets 0-60 times of about 8 seconds, with 28 city, 34 highway mileage (US gallons).
We've reviewed the 2002 Dodge Neon SXT.
Tommy Boy wrote this encouraging news: "I'd like to point your attention to the May 2002 issue of Grassroots Motorsports. This was no highbrow, stuffy whine-fest... they [took] 7 'pocket rockets under $20,000' to the local autocross to see how they matched up. While they were there, they put each car on a chassis dyno and also measured 0-60 times. The cars included 2002 versions of the Mazda MP3, VW Golf GTI turbo, Nissan Sentra SE-R, Focus SVT, Civic Si, Hyundai Tiburon V6, and the Neon ACR. ... When all was said and done, the Neon finished mid-pack in 0-60 (7.9 seconds). But on the road course the Neon spanked the others like a cruel stepmother. It finshed the course at least 1.5 seconds ahead of the Focus, and 2 or 3 seconds ahead of everything else. They loved the handling, saying if I remember, that with the car dialed in right (bear in mind it has adjustable suspension pieces from the factory) it had as close to perfect handling as it gets in this class. They found some complaint with every other car in the test, concerning handling. All this, gents, and it was easily the cheapest car in the test to boot!"
"BMG" noted that Motor Trend ran a 2000 Neon ES in the slalom at 64.9 mph... Considering a Neon ES is only riding on 15 inch Goodyears, that's impressive. The Neon ES beat the AWD Suburu Impreza WRX -- which only managed a 61.4 MPH slalom! The Neon ES was also faster than a Pontiac Trams Am WS6 which only managed 64.6 MPH! (We suspect the Impreza out-accelerated the Neon, but since Neons start at $11,000 and the WRX is in the $20s, that's okay, right?)
Note that retrofitting the 2.4 engine seems very difficult.
The Neon is sold at a price premium outside the United States, competing against cars which Americans would never consider alongside the humble Neon. While it does have some competitive advantages - space and air conditioning, for example - its fuel economy and small-engine acceleration work against it.
Christopher Krisocki (WebTV user) wrote provided some information from a German 2002 car guide. The 1.6-liter engine in the Neon is listed as making 115hp (85kW) @ 5500 rpm, and 157 Nm torque @ 4550. He also noted that there is a 2-liter Sebring convertible in Europe, with a five-speed manual; and that the diesel engine in the Voyager is a 16-valve DOHC and makes 142hp (104kW) @ 4000 rpm and a whopping 320 Nm of torque @ 2000 rpm (this only comes with a five-speed.) A 2.0-liter Neon costs only 608 Euros more than a 1.6!
In early 2001, the Neon R/T and ACR were re-introduced to the world. Both come with a single-cam, 150 horsepower version of the standard 133 hp 2.0 "Magnum" engine, which makes extra power from an active intake manifold and many tuning details. Rich Hutchinson tells us that the ACR is a low option, race oriented vehicle - an R/T without any fluff. Click here for details on both.
The astounding Neon SRT-4 is covered here.
I purchased new July 15, 2002 my Neon SXT. I have been in the past a strictly Ford owner, but after seeing and hearing reports surrounding the Focus I decided to see what else was out there.
After much research I contacted my local "Five Star Dealer" and basically handled the purchase and financing without ever leaving my home. One visit to the dealer and one hour later drove my Neon home. My experience with the dealer was "5-star" all the way.
As you probably know, the Neon SXT package is a tremendous bargain. I have the 5-speed version, including power windows/locks, cruise control, CD player, spoiler, aluminum wheels, my price out the door including rebate was only $11,250!!!!
I have not had to return for any type of warranty service, repair, or adjustment. The HVAC is awesome (air VERY cold here in South Texas), runs like a scalded cat, and returns 34-35 mpg, as 90% of my driving is Interstate.
I wrote to Dodge customer service (e-mail) telling them all of this, asking them why don't they advertise the Neon, and received a form letter back, very polite but saying nothing.
Is all the corporate ad budget tied up with the new Ram? Do they NOT want the Neon to succeed? Any postings to your website with your thoughts on this would be most appreciated.
Summary: don't you wish they could get some Honda Civic buyers to road-test a Neon before they waste $3,000 more on an inferior car?
| Review Notes: 2000 Neon 5-Speed | |
| Clearly Superior In: | Handling, interior room |
| Above Average In: | Ride, price, convenience, thinking about the driver |
| Needs Work In: | Climate controls, road noise/gear ratios, automatic transmission |
Please see our updated 2002-2003 Neon SXT automatic reviews!
The original Neon appeared on the market in January 1994...as a 1995 model. For five years, Chrysler refined it without changing its appearance, eventually replacing about a third of the chassis parts. By 1998, the Neon had become what the 1994 models should have been.
Five years and two months after the first release, the 2000 Neons started to appear on dealers' lots. The troublesome frameless windows and exhaust donut were gone, and the whole car had been tweaked to make it easier to own, drive, and love. Was it really a new car? Yes and no -
The ride is better, especially on bumpy roads, yet handling seems to be just as good, thanks to stiffer sway bars and other changes. The trunk is larger, there is more interior room, and the doors have frames; yet, despite the added weight, the engine feels more responsive, and it can still do 0-60 in roughly 8.0 seconds. The lovable front end has been replaced by what can best be described as a generic small-car front, in the only significant loss from the first series.
This car is clearly still a Neon. It looks more expensive and larger, which it is, but the Neon character remains when you drive it.
The engine has been tweaked to provide more low-end power, making "stoplight" performance substantially better. The Neon's ability to get away from a standing start now matches its ability to run down the highway. Roomy and zoomy and torquey, too.
There have been minor changes to the instrument panel, including a cruise control light (including a separate, helpful "SET" light) and an odometer that lights up when the door is opened, so mechanics don't need the key to read the mileage. A new, pleasant white-faced instrument package is eminently readable at night. New cubbies and a new cup holder have been added, as well as a nonskid sunglass tray. The change tray has been redesigned so you can use it while driving, the air vents are larger and quieter, and the headlights have been moved to a stalk. It still looks as much like a Neon inside as a Cavalier does, which is to say, it's instantly recognizable.
The stereo has been improved somewhat, but the climate controls carried forward with that oddball "turn the fan left for a/c, right for vent, except when the defroster is on." Someone should tell Chrysler that customers get confused by this, and drive with the a/c on all the time, then complain about their slow Neons with bad gas mileage (I strongly suspect this is why Consumer Reports found the Neon to be "anemic" and also achieved rather poor fuel economy).
The engine mounts have been revised so the car feels more solid and smooth on takeoff. There seems to be room for a larger engine or supercharger, but that's pure speculation; the optional automatic transmission might take up that space.
Handling is excellent. Even with midgrade Eagle GA tires, the Neon clearly outperforms a Corolla using performance Potenza 930 tires. Thanks to Chrysler for beefing up the sway bars and making other adjustments to compensate for the smoother ride and longer wheelbase; the car feels nimble and stable at all speeds and is unfazed by strong winds. The brakes also seem to grip better, and more readily. On the whole, with smoother shifting and a more refined engine, this version of the Neon is much easier to drive smoothly in the city than the original.
Where did Chrysler screw up? The extra highway power, gained from a revised fifth gear ratio, comes at the cost of engine noise when travelling over 60 mph. We like the new power in fifth, but keep wanting to shift into a higher gear; we think they went a little too far. (This becomes especially clear when you move to the smooth Corolla). Though we like the addition of traction control (not available on our test car), we think it odd that the tachometer is not standard, but is part of a power lock/alarm package! This is especially true since the engine gave no audible indication it was approaching redline, but suddenly wham! we were there, and the rev limiter hits hard. Somehow, the Corolla doesn't seem to hurt as much when it hits the rev limiter.
In our experience, gas mileage was the same for both the new and old Neon; but the EPA tells us there is quite a penalty, with estimated highway mileage plummeting from 41 mpg to 34. We're not sure who to believe, especially since our driving included time trials, which eat fuel, and high-speed driving well above most speed limits, which should have have hurt us given the change in fifth gear. City mileage estimates are almost identical.
This redesign is a winner. Though it was more evolutionary than revolutionary, it made the Neon is the best economy car for those who want any measure of performance. With a Corolla-like ride, no personality quirks, a zoomy and torquey engine, and the best handling in its class (with a racing pedigree to prove it), the Neon truly stands out above the competition. (If only it still looked like the original!)
Speaking of competition:
We much prefer the Neon to the overrated Civic.
Those who are willing to pay for handling and power should look at the all wheel drive Subaru Impreza.
The Toyota Corolla may be the foremost Neon competitor (in the same price class). With a peppy 125 hp engine (since enhanced) that achieved 38 mpg in our tests, a superior ride, many creature comforts, and a Toyota reputation, the Corolla was an outstanding small car. Though no match for the Neon in handling, under everyday driving the engine was just as snappy. The Corolla clearly outshines the Civic, Escort, and other competitors; as did the first-generation Neon, to be fair. [The Corolla's prices have been lowered in recent years, narrowing the gap further].
Now (last updated in 2002, before the 2003 Corollas came out. The 2003 Corolla is the same size as the Neon inside, with far better gas mileage - especially with the automatic! - and better sound insulation. The Neon's main advantages over the Corolla are price and two seconds zero-to-sixty, or so, and handling. The Corolla's main advantages remain comfort - if perhaps a bit over-insulated - resale price, and expected reliability), the two cars are more evenly matched. How do they play out?
(Courtesy amx1969@earthlink.net)
Style is not bad at all in person! Fit and finish is excellent!
Under the hood it is evident that DC did some good work on the engine mounts and the throttle body and air box. It looks like the front may have been extended slightly to allow repositioning of the battery and airbox. Not sure if the first generation Neon could be modified to accept the new setup.
Interior panels and dash look of higher quality and even the base has fabric on the doors. Base models come with black background instruments and the high level models come with white dial faces. Seats are vastly improved over the 1st generation. Some nifty juggling of the emergency brake handle ( to the passenger side) has allowed for a large cupholder behind (rear of car) the shifter. The same two cupholders in the 1st generation are still in place. Dash is similar to Intrepid and has a neat recess just about the size of a sunglass case in the center. The bottom of that recess has some skid resistant material on it which should allow putting your sunglass case there without having slide all over the place. Light stalk is now like a Honda, that is to say that high beams are actuated by clicking the stalk toward the driver rather than pushing away for beams in the first generation. In addition the light switch and dimmer switch for the dash lights are on the same stalk. Fold down seats appear to be standard in all levels.
I guess that is what makes the older Neon so endearing to most of us is that it has a few rough edges but a lot of soul!
Nicole Shumate reported that her 2001 Neon came without the clips that hold the PCV hose in place, resulting in a serious crash when the PCV hose interfered with the accelerator cable. That's a serious enough problem that we recommend you check out your car (we haven't verified it ourselves).
Power steering pumps: "Mr. Source" wrote, "there is a new part number for NEONS STRATUS, and MINIVANS. The fix comes because when you are driving your car on a non-smooth pavement, you will here a clunking coming from the steering column or from the suspension, plus after driving your vehicles for many miles in the city, (heavy traffic), the power steering pump begins to make a noise every time you turn your wheel (pressure failure).
Randy wrote:
So far this is what I've heard [about Neon problems]. These are not scientific and just what "floats around".
Now,what you need to ask is the prevalence of these "defects" for all the numbers produced. I own a 2000 ES 5 speed and can say this.
The engine is louder than a comparable Japanese car. But, then again the car will do 0-60 between 7.9 to 8.3 sec depending on what mag you read. It has a sound that I find exciting when revving thru the first three gears. Others who have driven it agree also. There is a 132 HP engine on the other side of the dashboard,and it can be heard. It is not at all noisy at highway speeds in 5th gear. I do not know about the auto model's noise at highway speeds.
Mine idles smoothly and the vibration felt through the steering wheel is very minimal. As far as dashboard peeling and interior problems, none for me, and the interior is very well done and is comfortable. I have done several 400 mile trips and the seats are more than just nicely stitched.
This is one of those cars that you either love or hate.The 95-99 models had problems and Chrysler's and the Neons reputation is affected by them. There are however more owners satisfied with their Neons than those who are not.
Also remember that those who are satisfied are not inclined to go on the Internet, search out a type specific car and say "This car is great". Those who are not happy will.
I recommend the 5 speed over the auto,but in this country most people do not care to drive a manual. The manual model flies, and its gearbox is a joy to shift.
I paid less than $14,500 for mine fully loaded except for sunroof. The VW, Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Honda, and Saturn were much more expensive and very dull. It is a very capable, and fun car to drive, and that is primarily why I bought it. Your criteria may be different.
...The Dodge Neon is a well made, exciting car to drive (especially 5 speed) that is very inexpensive to buy.
| 2003 Corolla | 2002 Civic | 2002 Neon | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Front | Rear | Front | Rear | Front | Rear | |
| Headroom | 39 | 37 | 40 EX: 38 |
37 EX: 36 |
38.4 | 37 |
| Legroom | 41 | 35.4 | 42 | 36 | 42 | 35 |
| Hip room | 52 | 46 | 51 | 50 | 52.4 | 53 |
| Shoulder room | 53 | 53.5 | 52.6 | 50 | 53.4 | 53 |
| Trunk space | 13.6 cubic feet | 13 cubic feet | 13 cubic feet | |||
| HP | Torque | HP | Torque | HP | Torque | |
| Base engine | 130 | 125 | 115 | 110 | 132 | 130 |
| Optional engine (Civic: EX only) | 127 | 114 | 150 | 135 | ||
| Civic HX has 117 hp, higher gas mileage ratings; 2003 Neon SRT to have 205 hp. | ||||||
| Gas mileage (EPA) | City | Highway | City | Highway | City | Highway |
| Base engine, manual trans | 32 | 40 | 33 | 39 | 27 | 33 |
| Base engine, automatic | 30 | 38 | 30 | 38 | 24 | 31 |
| Optional engine, manual | 32 | 37 | 27* | 33* | ||
| Optional engine, auto | 31 | 38 | ||||
| Performance (manual trans.) | ||||||
| 0-60, base engine | 9.5 sec (AAA) | 10.4 sec (Cons. Guide) |
8.1 sec (AAA) | |||
| 0-60, optional engine | n/a | 9.0 sec (AAA) | 7.9 sec (Grassroots) | |||
| Handling (AAA ratings) | 7 (LE) | 7 (EX) | 8 (ES or SE) | |||
| Emissions | ULEV | ULEV | [unknown] | |||
| Base price |
$12,568 CE to |
$12,670 - $19,000 |
About $10,000 (S) |
|||
Click here to see an overview of the changes, technical details, specifications, and more!
Click here to visit the "Classic Neon" site
Please see our updated 2002-2003 Neon SXT automatic reviews
Click here for the owners' forum
Allpar covers all Chrysler and related vehicles* with news, performance tips, forums, histories, repairs, racing, and more. Use the menus on top of the pages!
Cars - Engines - History - Forums - Repairs - Reviews - Other car reviews - Us - Terms of Service - News - Random link -
Corrections/Additions
Please read the terms of use! * Mopar, Dodge, Jeep, Chrysler, HEMI, and certain other names are trademarks of Chrysler, LLC. We are not Chrysler. We are not responsible for the consequences of actions taken based on this site and make no guarantees regarding validity or applicability of information or advice. The Webmaster is not an expert. Copyright © 1998-2000, David Zatz; copyright © 2001-2008, Allpar LLC. All rights reserved. Recommend this page!
We hope you liked Allpar's Jeep, Plymouth, Chrysler, and Dodge car, truck, and minivan information.
