The Kia Optima: Dodge Caliber sedan simulator?
The most interesting things about the new World Engine are now, to me, its distinctive flavor and its inability to produce satisfying low-rev power. Admittedly, my primary driver is a 2.4 turbo - a long-stroke engine that does get moving from low revs-per-minute - but I’m not so far away from the old ‘95 Neon to remember what an ordinary four cylinder is like.
The World Engine in the Caliber provides decent enough gas mileage considering the weight it has to pull around, but power is another story. Many blame the CVT, and even I singled out the CVT’s characteristics for making the Caliber seem sluggish, but the engine feels similar in the Kia Optima. Buzzy, reluctant to move at low rpm, and demon quick once it’s up in its small power band, near redline. That’s all kind of funny because Hyundai/Kia has rather different “dressings” on the engine - each company using these things uses their own heads, valve systems, and fuel delivery systems. Yet it feels the same with the Hyundai trim as it does with the Dodge trim.
The Optima I’m driving has the 2.4 liter engine, the top of the line until you get into the not-yet-produced turbo models, which promise far better power. Unlike the Caliber, the Optima is tuned with a steep tip-in, which means that a gentle touch on the gas pedal dumps a lot of fuel into the engine, which is all very nice for feeling like you have a powerful car but not so good for easy, gentle driving or stop and go traffic (I notice Volvo likes to do that now, too.) But when it comes right down to it, the Optima with the World Engine is not responsive at all, unless you shift yourself and stay in high rpms. The engine feels like there’s a huge rubber band between the gas pedal and the throttle, and once the band tightens you snap forward.
The Optima feels remarkably like the Caliber, though they are on completely different platforms, with darned little other than the basic engine block in common. The instrument panel is a mix of original thinking and 300M-style bright rings around big gauges, and is very attractive, much more so (to me at least) than that of the Caliber and certainly more than the Sebring’s mixed-metaphor interior.
Based on this experience, I can almost see why there’s no Dodge Caliber sedan. Reviewers are harsher critics of cars than SUVs in my experience; they even let the RX330 and Ford Explorer get rave reviews, while trashing the Ford 500 and, yes, the current Dodge Stratus. I can’t see them giving a thumbs up to a Dodge that acts and sounds like this Kia, and don’t tell me it wouldn’t, because the Caliber does. And it’s gotten some flack for that, with reservations that it does have an SUV shape and look, so it must hold a lot of stuff. (Note that I don’t necessarily agree with that positive assessment.)
So I have to say… Chrysler Group, don’t put the PT onto the Caliber platform. Adapt the current PT/Neon platform to flexible manufacturing somehow, make it work for safety and weight reduction, and then make a PT-based sedan using the 2.4 liter engine - not the World Engine, but the current one. Start a crash four-cylinder engine design program. Admit that using Hyundai as the genesis for a new block didn’t work out quite as you expected it to, and figure out something else. Apply the greatness that characterizes the Chrysler Group engine design department, that has always characterized that department, that has made practically every single engine every engineered at Chrylser into a winner, and get us a new four-cylinder. In the meantime, we have the Neon engine out there, ready to be adapted with variable-valve technology and kept alive for a few more years. We have the remains of the incredibly successful Neon chassis - successful in terms of low cost and high performance, not public perception - use it. Just whatever you do, no matter how much I ask you to do it, don’t tell me or anyone else that it’s from the Neon! Say, um, that Mercedes graciously came down to Earth and dropped it in Chrysler’s lap.
We won’t tell if you won’t.
Given the rather tasteless ads being done now by the head of DCX, making him look like a rather dulliard boob, and that dcx did not listen to the thousands of voices that blasted them for putting the “Charger” nomenclature on a four door sedan, I rather think that your entreaty to build a great Chrysler engineering engine will fall on deaf ears. I believe Mercedes to be neither gracious, nor earth bound in the hypocracy that only they can make cars/engines/transmissions.
The lack of low-end grunt has long been a ‘trademark’ of ‘non-American’ 4 cylinder engines. Look back at specs and reviews and it’s quite common to hear that the Toyota’s and Honda’s and such all had peaky powerbands way up high and nothing down low, where the Neon, Cavalier, et al all had decent low-end grunt, but would peter out well before the upper-end was ever reached.
Seems to me that a decision was made to go with a more “foreign-style” of tuning with the GEMA engines - ie; power up top, not so much on launch. Hey, if it’s acceptable to those millions of Honda and Toyota buyers, then it must be good for us, right?
And that combination of the “foreign tuning” along with the CVT seems to be the source of the “lack of low-end power feeling” being leveled against the Caliber and Compass.
Now, as far as a call to NOT build a sedan from the Caliber platform - I’m patiently awaiting the results of Mitsubishi’s next-gen Lancer sedan - which is just that - a sedan built from the Caliber platform. Take a look here at Inside Line…
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/GeneralFuture/articleId=116193#7
Another interesting choice from Mitsu. The concept was exciting, lets hope they didn’t take all the edginess away from the production model. Like the new “i”, which screams “SMART” all over it, but better executed, Mitsu is coming back. The “i” is a hit in Japan. Perhaps that is the impetus for DCX to send Smart to the USA. Although the Mitsu model is better executed, and better poised to make good inroads in the niche at 11 grand.
I would love to see Mitsu bring the ‘i’ and the Colt over here and grab some new small car marketshare - timing is everything. Shame that the stuff needed to do that would likely delay either to the point where others would get ahead of them.
So would I. The new Outlander from Mitsu looks great, and apparently comes up or exceeds expectations. The engine is a winner. I would also like to see them bring back the van that they have. I see them elsewhere in the world in all kinds of applications. I had a ‘88 that I just kept for 12 years, with no major problems at all. I’d like a chance at the “i” for commuting.
I’ve been driving the Optima for a bit longer now.
Power is incredible over 4,000 rpm. The problem appears to be largely in a slow transmission, just as in the Caliber it’s in WEIGHT and a transmission that doesn’t react the way people expect it to.
How does the transmission react? Slow to change ranges or bulky, waiting for the engine to find a power band it operates better in? Twist in the engine is better at lower rpm, especially for torque happy Americans who like take off better than high speed. The transmissions, such as the torqueflite were built to handle, quite happily BTW, anything that the engine could put out. Could it be that more development is called for in regards to this continuous variable gear box?
I test drove the Caliber in the early spring because I needed a 4 door car and fuel economy for my 72 mile one way commute… I drove the R/T with the 2.4 CVT AWD I loved the idea that it had AWD and the new 4-banger with 170+HP. However when my wife and I drove this car we both hated the CVT. I probably would have purchased the car if I could have gotten the 2.4 with a manual or a normal AT. The CVT was the only thing that I really didn’t like about the car. I have been a mopar guy for many years however, I ended up purchasing a 2006 Honda Accord. This is my first Honda and so far I am extremely happy with it… I think Dodge needs to do more testing of products and get public opinion in determining what option(s) that people will buy and if they like the product such as the CVT. It sucks that I didn’t have a choice to get a manual or AT in this car. I am sure that many other people who have test drove this vehicle have came to the same conclusion…..
That is exactly why I purchsed another PT Cruiser- the engine/trans in the Caliber was a huge disappointment. The PT had better fit/finish and more upscale interior, quieter and smoother engine- all for $13,000 for the base model with air and auto (father’s employee price). I hope Chrysler doesn’t not ruin the PT and use the CVT.
Curtis, the transmission is the perceptual problem but the real issue is that this engine simply will not perform below 3,500 rpm and only takes off at 4,000. A stick shift would certainly do a lot fo solve the responsiveness problem which may be why people seem happier with the little 1.8. Frankly this would be a GREAT engine for the Corolla or Civic and I suspect they benchmarked the Corolla/Matrix XRS which also has an engine that’s useless in the normal dirivng range.
The 2.4 Caliber stick-shift is rumored to be in the works and should have come out first… and yes, I agree with Scott K on the PT vs the Caliber, though the Caliber’s gas mileage is much better.
I can’t believe there’s no Neon replacement.
“The 2.4 Caliber stick-shift is rumored to be in the works and should have come out first”
Maybe down the road as an option. But it’s already out in the Compass, even on “4×4″ models.
A 5 speed transmission is now available on Caliber R/T FWD models but not on AWD.
I will be testing a Compass with the five speed manual transmission in a couple of week, and hopefully will have a much happier experience to report. Still, most people DO drive automatics….
The CVT is fine with me because I don’t do jack rabbit starts. I’ve driven 350hp Chargers and been left in the dust at traffic lights by girls in 120hp Saturns. The only thing that is tough getting used to is that dip the power takes after it shifts into “second” gear. Otherwise it’s fine.
I own a Matrix, not what I wanted to purchase to replace my ‘96 Cirrus LXI 2.4 but I promissed my wife she could
pick the next car we bought. I am not a big fan but this car just goes and goes. When DCX showed up at the
dealership. I went out on a ride and drive, being the only owner of the competition the boy’s from DCX wanted
my response to the new ride. I thought that the car was all right a bit nicer from the last Neon I had drove.
(I think was a ‘97 SOHC) My thoughts were how close DCX copied the Matrix, not to sound like a heathen I think the
Matrix has a better interior, but the exterior of the Caliber has grown on me especially the 18 inch rims of
the RT’s. The liftgate opening is rather small on the Caliber and so is the rear window which is stationary not
a fliper like the Matrix. I like the Calipers beverage cooler but I wonder how many will be in for warranty issues
come next year when more are on the road. I guess if the Caliber was out when we had bought the ‘05 it would have
been a toss up but I probably would have bought the Dodge
The manual transmission is just fine after you get used to it. Still, you only really get power at higher rpms, and you have to keep the engine spinning faster than I normally do.
I am a Mopar fan and have driven the Caliber, with the 2.0 motor, and I agree that the motor and the CVT tranny are sluggish. I agree that the 2.4 in the PT Cruiser is much better and should be an option for the Caliber. It has the bottom torque that drivers want. I don’t need HP at 5000 RPM, I need lots of torque at 1500-2000 RPM.
I hope the Mopar managers get this message.
I almost bought a Caliber in April. After driving it and a PT I picked the PT on both power and style. I’m not a SUV guy and the sluggishness of the Caliber along with the poor visibility bothered me. I bought a base model PT with a stick. It may not be a hot rod but it isn’t hard to dial up power on the line. I find it interesting that the PT is sold as a manual transmission car with almost all other options yet the Caliber is sold only as an automatic with anything but the base engine. This has to be called “stupid marketing”.
Yeah, from 0 to 15mph the CVT 2 liter Caliber is sluggish. I think it’s the electronics. Why Chrysler put a low velocity governor on the CVT beats me. But I drive for mileage. Get 35MPG on the highway. & the CVT is a magic carpet gliding up hills & mountains. People complain about the CVT shift shockless drive. But if CVTs had been the first automatic transmissions, no one would ever have bought a geared automatic transmission later in automotive history. & my featherfooting mileage over 4000 foot mountain passes…almost 7% OVER the EPA highway mileage…32+MPG. Yes, the CVT electronics keep the gearing continually in the best economic gear & I love to pass the gas stations. I stick my tongue out at the ego & hormone laden people who have to pour pollution out over the landscape so they can drive faster than is good for them. Besides…once the CVT is over 15mph, the 2 Liter acceleration is OK. & if emergency acceleration is needed, pushing the gas pedal hard above 25mph overcomes a detent that places the engine in power mode, making passing acceptably safe.
Well, there is the gas mileage. It’s not great unless you count the weight of the vehicle. Somehow the Matrix still managers better mileage, albeit with less creature comfort. The PT with stick is pretty nice. If you want a Caliber with a 2.4 and a stick, buy the Compass.
I own a 2.4L FWD caliber, only upgrades are an k&n intake and magnaflow exaust. It seems to accelerate just fine.
Has anyone here tried the autostick feature? If so, have you tried longer than 5 minutes? If you answered no to both, then you have no reason to criticize the lack of low end, mid range or high end acceleration. Play with it everyday and you’ll find what you’re missing. It still won’t be a Charger with a hemi, but it won’t be a slug anymore either. Acceleration is there, you just have to know where it is.Once you do learn it, use it only when necessary or the mileage will suffer.
I have a R/T AWD Caliber w/ AutoStick.
No. Even in autostick, the car’s a damn slug on launch.