A small addition to the Dodge Charger

I own three chargers, a 1972, a 1974, and a 2006. While I like the 2006, my main gripe is not the 4-door aspect, but the front end. I’ve attached a bit of a concept (I design for film and television) that I would love to see if others feel the same way about. Judging by the reaction to the new Mustang and the upcoming Camaro, I really wish Chrysler would recondition the front end to be more of a throwback to that most loved feature, the grille “maw” and hidden headlights. While it may not be as aerodynamic, I’m sure enthusiasm would skyrocket with just this bold decision. It would be worth it if all of those tuner body kit guys would set about looking at making a throwback kit like this, in between the umpteenth 1995 Civic add-on.

There is no mistaking, that grille says Charger. Let me know what you think.

More confidence in the Dodge Caravan

Today, I gained a lot more confidence in the Dodge Caravan.

The occasion was a press event, where Chrysler rented out part of Central Park to introduce local journalists to the new minivans, Dakota, and Liberty. The four shone in the hot sun, amidst the kiddy rides, all looking far better than I expected - particularly the Dakota, which has a new “face,” in this case (Laramie) all chrome. According to the trucks platform PR manager, they want to move the Dakota from the “baby Ram” concept to being a lifestyle vehicle, and have been discussing different features, size, and other aspects of the Dakota with customers. Expect lots of changes to the Dakota in the future - but for now, we have new styling that looks far more at home on the mid-to-large pickups.

The two minivans were there, side by side, and differences began to appear as I studied them. The Dodge instrument panel had three huge pods, with a ribbed plastic glove compartment; the Chrysler (a Limited version) had light wood trim, including large pieces on the dash and instrument panel, and dull silver accents, with a flatter set of four gauges surrounded by dull silver trim rings. The grade of leather looked better on the Chrysler, as did the fabric on the back of the middle seats. There were similar “small but important” differences on the outside, with the Chrysler having more chrome accents and chrome door handles, and the Dodge having subtly different sheet metal to make it look more sporty. (Yes, I said sporty.) The Chrysler hood was not ribbed; they were striving for a 300 look, and apparently the ribs didn’t work out.

What made me confident was the level of testing these vehicles went through. We were told that they had been through more wind-tunnel testing than any Chrysler-brand vehicle sold before, and I believe it. Dave Smith, who rose up from electrical engineering to platform management, discussed with authority the changes they made to the headlamps, A-pillars, mirrors, sills, and roof-rack; the metal crease in the rear is a “flick” for better wind flow. When questioned, Dave Smith was enthusiastic, almost eager to describe what they had done and discovered (and, yes, they do wind tunnel testing with both front and rear license plates). They also used 20% thicker glass on side windows to reduce noise. One result of this is that the gas mileage, using tougher 2008 standards, is 17 city, 24 highway on the 3.3 liter model (with a four speed automatic), and 16 city, 23 highway on the 3.8 and 4.0 liter models (with six speed automatics).

Dave told me that the chassis was completely new on this van, with a suspension they have not used before - MacPherson strut up front, with a twist-beam in the rear. He also told me that the Chrysler people were given autonomy over these decisions, and were not ordered to use any particular configuration by the Daimler or Mercedes people (which is probably why it doesn’t have a multilink rear suspension). He said that they spent a huge amount of time tuning the suspension, striving to reach a balance between Honda’s sport tuning and Toyota’s comfort tuning. The structure and use of stronger steel minimizes body roll, making it feel safer in aggressive twisting; and towing uses special shocks that pump up with a liquid so that the ride doesn’t degrade.

Also important was what Dave Smith said about the test drives. They took these vans through a variety of places, and discovered that strong sunlight could cause problems; owners of pretty much any cab-forward car can describe some of those. As a result, they worked hard on issues of reflectivity (seeing the dashboard in the windshield, etc), visibility (the LED bulbs could get washed out in sunlight), and other issues. They did clinics with customers and employees and suppliers and their families; and engineers watched through the one-way glass or actually had conversations with the people to get more in-depth knowledge. These may be the most well tested vehicles Chrysler has produced, and that is one reason I am optimistic. Another is that Dave Smith seems to be genuinely enthusiastic in a way I have not seen for a while, and I can see him arousing the enthusiasm of others along the way.

Oh, and that wonderful windshield-wiper defroster element put into place with the second generation minivans, and dropped with the last generation before the 2008s? Dave said that instead of having a heating element, they optimized the front defroster so that it would achieve the same goal, namely melting ice on the wiper blade. That was partly a side effect of the better airflow, but it was also intentional, a way to solve the problem of wiper-blade icing.

That’s not even to mention all the wonders of the new minivan feature lists - the switch-operated seats that fold into the floor quickly and easily, the swivel seats with tables, the video systems, the stability control and rollover protections, the in-floor storage, the mesh pockets and overhead storage rail system, the integrated child and/or booster seats, the heated front and rear seats, the sunshades, flashlight, removeable seat, umbrella holder, premium sliding center console, dishwasher safe removeable cupholders, LED lighting, and illuminated map pockets on the doors.

As added bonuses, the new minivans are cheaper than the ones they replace - and have more features - and get slightly better gas mileage, or so we’re told. And according to Chrysler, the target markets for these vans - a certain type of family and empty-nesters - will be increasing quite a bit over the next five years, so perhaps, despite declining market shares (and I really don’t expect that to change now that Toyota and Honda both have minivans that, depending on your values, are in the same league), production may actually increase. That would be great news for all the workers in the two minivan plants, because under the new rulers, even a minor decline in sales could result in a decision to cut minivan production, raise prices, and close a plant. But I’m pretty confident that, unless the reviewers really are wearing the same blinders they wear with mid-sized cars, the new minivans will sell like hotcakes - and that the people who buy them will come back for more, just like in the good ol’ days.

The Name Game – Brand Equity and Chrysler

Corolla, Civic, Altima, E-class, 3 Series; Everyone knows these names and the vehicles they describe. Why? Simply put, it is brand equity. Start small, and build on it. Keep building on it. Improve each generation, build loyalty to a nameplate and a company.

I don’t know how many generations of Corolla there are, or 3 Series, or Golf. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that these Companies have made continuous improvement to the same nameplate for several generations. The result is brand loyalty, and repeat business, for the nameplate and the company.

Why is this so hard for the domestic manufacturers to understand? By changing your nameplate with every new incarnation of vehicle you suggest that the last one wasn’t worth preserving – ergo, your company makes throwaway vehicles, not built to last, not here for the long haul, not worth being loyal to. This creates a perception of low quality, quick turnover, and a lack of respect for the people purchasing your product. Are these not the same qualities ascribed to the domestic three?

To be fair, the truck divisions of all three have got it, finally we have generational truck lines. Still not so in the car lines, though, with a few exceptions. What does Caliber mean to me, or Compass? Give me a third gen Neon, or a Valiant, or a Fury. I would like to buy something with some history and longevity.

Chrysler and Dodge are finally looking to their heritage to build equity, but so far they are trading on past glory. They need to commit to a long term development of specific vehicles and to stick with it. To show some serious commitment to their own products and history and drop the faddish name changing. It hurts your reputation, and the public perception of your product.

Take the 300 for example. Why ‘C’, when it should be ‘N’. That would make a believer out of me. Why cheapen the 300 nameplate with base 2.7 V6! That’s what killed it the first time around. ‘Banker’s Hot Rod’, was the term, fast, beautiful and expensive. You’ve arrived baby! Revive another name for a lesser car and keep the letter cars exclusive. That is brand equity. The Imperial was Chrysler’s technology leader, and competed with the best in the world, do it again, right this time.

Don’t drop the PT Cruiser, make it better, same with the Pacifica, you were first out with the crossover, brag about it, then go whup the competition’s butt with the next one. Bring back Plymouth, whatever the cost, it’s your bread and butter. Now is your chance to fix perhaps the biggest mistake DaimlerChrysler made and reintroduce Chrysler’s economy brand.

I know people who are on their third Corolla, fourth Civic, and other than the minivans, I can’t think of a single third generation Chrysler product. (trucks excluded) How can you build owner loyalty with a constantly changing nomenclature? It’s a simple answer; pick a name and a product and develop it over time. Stop throwing out the baby with the bathwater!

The new Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Avenger

When the new 300 came out, it was definitely a mixed bag. On the one hand, in its favor were superb cornering and handling feel - a nice sense of balance for a large vehicle combined with great road holding and a driver-tuned stability control system came from the combination of expensive Mercedes E-Class suspension design (modified to fit underneath a Chrysler and presumably to not bankrupt the company), tuned by the experts at Chrysler. (We saw from the Crossfire, particularly the SRT-6, that Chrylser is better at tuning Mercedes cars than Mercedes is.) Adding to the attraction was the top Hemi engine, which provided superlative boost with hardly any fuss and V6-style gas mileage. On the down-side was the performance with the base V6, both in acceleration and gas mileage; the 3.5’s moderately disappointing, though still perfectly acceptable, acceleration; and the relatively Spartan interior. While the 300C was definitely classy outside, inside it was, well, economy plus a nice analog clock. Compared with the 300M, the 300C is downright cheap inside - at least in appearance. We have been assured that it is actually far less susceptible to squeaks and rattles over time, not that the 300M was bad; but the 300/300C should be “world class” in that regard.

After the LX series, we saw the introduction of the Caliber, which proved that the PT Cruiser was not the last overweight smallish vehicle to be made by Chrysler. In case you thought the designers of the AMC Eagle - a compact car weighing a good two tons - had taken away their spirit, we had a surprisingly heavy small wagon, whose porky presence on the scales brought sub-Neon performance from engines with far more horsepower than the Neon ever got (unless you include the SRT-4, and to match the SRT-4, the Caliber SRT-4 will add a good 70 horsepower). Which brings us to the Sebring/Avenger.

The new mid-sized cars will hopefully give Chrysler a shot in the arm in that missing part of their product line, the popular family sedan. Chrysler used to play a huge role in that market, with A and B bodied cars, and then with various K-cars, and finally with the Spirit/Acclaim. The critically acclaimed Stratus and Sebring never sold as well as the Spirit/Acclaim, but actually made a profit; still, their sales never reached an acceptable level for a mainstream automaker with thousands of dealerships across the United States, with customers defecting to Toyota in droves for those bland, comfortable Camrys. The Stratus is set to get a more powerful base four-cylinder engine, with Chrysler’s lovely 3.5 liter V6 adding 50 hp to the current 2.7 liter engine, putting that power to the ground through a new, more efficient six-speed automatic. If the Stratus/Avenger keep their weight gains in check, they might just be able to match the 268 horsepower 2007 Camry (0-60 in 7 seconds), which also has a six-speed automatic, though the Camry’s EPA estimates (31 highway!) might be hard to reach at the same time. On the other hand, if they end up with a two-ton mid-sized car, we’re all in trouble. Maybe that won’t happen; the Caliber, after all, had to accommodate double duty as a Jeep, whereas, at least as far as we know, no Jeep version of the Sebring is planned.

We’ve now seen the Sebring and Avenger (spy shots are here) - and thanks, Autoblog for the link. Despite Dieter’s exhortations against identical twins carrying different nameplates, the only difference appears to be in their skins and perhaps a little suspension tuning, with the Avenger looking like a little Charger and the Sebring like a Charger with Crossfire styling. While we’re glad it’s not a mini-300C, the Sebring is clearly closely related to the Avenger, just as the Compass and Caliber are clearly twins.

Inside, the Sebring carries on the 300’s “silver and black” routine, with no rich burgundy, tan, or other colors; just the now-clichéd silver, gray, and black. The interior looks just about as Spartan as the 300, from what we’ve seen, even as the 300 is reportedly getting a restyled interior design to make it look, well, richer and more attractive. We sure hope that Chrysler plans to do more to the Sebring’s cabin before the official launch, because at the moment, it looks like another case of a pretty exterior and a dull, plasticky interior. Please prove me wrong, guys…!

The Charger Daytona roars into life

It’s always hard to believe that the same car, with minor tweaks, can change its character so completely. The Matrix is a harsh-riding, noisy vehicle compared to the similar Corolla; but that’s also a different form factor. The Crossfire SRT-8 has a surprisingly different feel from the standard Crossfire, and in my opinion is far more pleasant even when not taking it anywhere near its limits - in standard day to day traffic-congested driving. But the Charger Daytona is really the prime example of this; it starts where the Charger R/T leaves off, and almost feels like a completely different car. The interior has but a single major difference, the body-colored panel between the seats and anchoring the center stack, but it feels brighter, more open, and more upscale than the plain-jane Charger, with its unrelieved gray and black plastic. The passenger also has a bright, cheery label (not quite as upscale as the old Shelby plaques) telling you which production number it is - our test car was #8 of 4,000.

On the outside the Charger Daytona, particularly in yellow, really accentuates the Charger’s curves. Had we seen that one first, with its black-matte stripes, rear blackout, and hood treatment, I think that the outcry over how the Charger is an outrage would have been far more muted. With a few simple touches, the Charger suddenly becomes, well, a Charger, replete with curves and looking as though it’s ready to tear up the track.

The suspension tells the story for the driver; again, minor changes (available also as a performance package on the R/T) to spring rates and such make a huge difference in feel. The Charger Daytona always feels ready to leap at a moment’s notice; the stability control provides a dangerous sense of competence on wet, slick roads, allowing full-throttle acceleration with nary an indication of the impending doom should the driver do something, well, even more foolish than hitting the gas hard on a wet road. (Remember, we test these things in great big pavement areas, and took 300Cs and Magnums around snow-covered test tracks at Chrysler’s invitation). On dry roads, the Charger is simply superlative, with a tremendously confident feel and a seeming inability to lose traction. It feels more like a Z06 than any four-passenger sedan has a right to.

So, despite the ricer spoiler, lack of aerodynamics, and two extra doors…perhaps this really is a Charger Daytona after all. We didn’t try to get it to 180 mph… so that score remains to be settled. But it is a truly impressive vehicle, nearly as far above the Charger as the Charger is above the Avalon to the performance-minded. And while it may not have the mind-blowing raw power of the 426 Hemi or 440 Six-Pack, it does have pretty darned good power, thank you - more than we could use, a frustratingly large amount of instant-on power that meant that we couldn’t hear the engine roar for more than a few short seconds before having to lay off the throttle. The Daytona sounds like a 1970 NASCAR car - but at idle, the roar is muted enough to not be annoying over time. It’s quite a vehicle.

The best part is - the Daytona package is just $2,500. Sure, that sounds like a lot, but it comes with a lot. (A cheaper version is the R/T with performance handling package.)

Spread the word - but maybe we shouldn’t tell those import folk. Maybe they wouldn’t understand… and maybe there won’t be enough Daytonas for the faithful…

Addition! The full test drive story witih lots of photos is at http://www.allpar.com/reviews/2006/charger-review.html

…and the Dodge Avenger spy shots…

Even though these were first posted on the Allpar forums, we ended up finding them at Autoblog instead. Well, now they’re right here at Allpar where they belong, on our Dodge Avenger news and rumors page. We expect to get more photos soon. Congrats to the intrepid RedRiderBob for finding the Avenger in a Dodge press roll and to Michigan_79 for stopping the clock and providing screen caps - and no thanks to those who simply grabbed the images and stuffed them into THEIR blogs without any credit at all to redriderbob or allpar.