[Bodyguard]

2.0 Hurricane and 9 spd. Also the 9 speed would help the current range of engines at least in the acceleration dept, with a slight uptick in MPG. She acts like the Civic Si and GTI arent thirsty either, lets not forget the the GT gets 2 MPG better overall and does not require premium fuel, unlike the Si and GTI which cost you at least $0.40 more a gallon. Not saying the Dart is perfect or anywhere close but I would much rather spend my time in that cabin than the Si or GTI.

The GTI has a lot more HP and is a totally smoother and better sounding engine. The Tigershark is not good in the NVH. The Dart will never be fully competitive until it has a better engine. The 2.0 auto SXT I drove about 4 months ago drove ok but it was kinda slow and the engine sounded terrible above 4K....even my wife said "why does it sound so funny?".

 

[Bodyguard]

About 4 months ago my wife and I test drove a Dart SXT 2.0, Focus SE 2.0 and a Cruze LT Eco. I liked all of them actually. The Dart felt the slowest but not really by much at all, it was just the sound of the engine that was so weird. The 2.0 has kind of a honking intake noise at first then gets thrashy. The Chevy was softer riding than either but the Focus just felt better to drive. Its hard to explain but the steering was sharper and the car just felt athletic. It also had one thing that I think is important on a compact car; a hatchback. Coming from a PT with its incredible hauling capacity, we just cant go to a small sedan. The Dart is a nice car but it is merely competent whereas the Caliber was embarassing. (even thought the gen 2s were much better). The Focus would have been the one I would have bought out of the the three IF it was an SE with out MyFord Touch. I HATE touchscreens after having a Prius.

If a model is a "GT" it competes in a class that includes the GTI, 3, Focus ST etc. Even though it really does not have the chops too. Again, Dodge is let down by its TERRIBLE marketing department. With a record like the Dart, I have ZERO confidence that the 200 launch will go well. Chrylser has nobody with enough brains and strength of will in its marketing department to fix these flubs. They desperately need an Alan Mulally.

 

[Bodyguard]

I really dont think that transmission speeds are the problem. Hook any trans up to any 2.0 or 2.4 and it will still be a mediocre driving experience. The Tigersharks (World) are just not in the same class for NVH as almost any other engine in the competition. The engines sound like crap (the newer ones are quieter but they still sound BAD) when revved and that is where they make their power. I think all of the money spent on the Hellcat is an incredible waste of money and time.......a lot of money for a low production engine that could have been better spent on starting on a new 4. Like it or not, its fours that are the most important engines for the future. Hell, the new 3 cyl Ford EB is getting incredible reviews because of how smooth it is without balance shafts. The Fiesta ST with the EB 1.6 has almost 200hp and 202tq (91 octane). The Spark has a turbo engine as well...Everybody has more choices or better 4s (by better I mean NVH) than Chrysler does now.

Yes, yes, I know that the Hellcat is a "halo" engine for the Challenger to compete against the SVT 5.8 but with money so tight and about to get tighter as Fiat drains away money for its self, it was a poor choice.

 

[Bodyguard]

"Not really. The Dart GT would be fine with ~210-220 HP, which is doable out of a 2.4L engine without being too crazy. The 184HP 2.4L Darts are pretty good, much better than the 2.0."

HP has never been the WEs problem, it is and has been NVH. Its a hot mess compared to the competition.

"The Hellcat is likely to be the next-generation Hemi that's been rumored, especially considering it's going to be aluminum block. While the Hellcat itself will be a halo engine, it will likely lay the foundation for the "Gen IV Hemi" to be used throughout the corporation on Rams, Jeeps, Dodges and Chryslers. Much like GM's "Gen V LT1 6.2L" engine introduced with the C7 Corvette. The General followed up with 4.3L and 5.3L truck variants."

There are a lot of problems with that argument. First, if resources are an issue (they are, especially now that Fiat has access to Chryslers cash) and the problem is that Chrylser has an at least one competitive, if older, V8 (Hemi).....but has pretty much zero competitive fours. V8s will be important in the future but hardly the importance of v6s and fours. With CAFE regs getting tighter, in a few years I bet the only place one will see Chrylser V8s is in Rams. The Pentastar is by far the bigger seller in the SUVs and will continue to be. The company needs to allocate its cash to the most pressing need, a modern 4.
Notice that Chrylser does not have a 2.0 Turbo unit? Notice how Ford, GM, Audi, BMW, VW, Do? Along with the Koreans and soon to be Japanese? That displacement and turbo is the tonnage engine of the future and Chrysler has nothing in the pipeline like it (at least from what I have heard).

I think Chrylser needs a new DI four that can be from 1.4 (for a truly competitive sub compact) a 1.6 for compacts, a 2.0 turbo (around 215 hp) and a premium 2.0 Turbo at about 260hp for maybe an SRT or just premium engine for larger cars.

V8s are important and will be around for a while longer BUT, that importance pales in comparison to the need for a good fours.

The WGE is a Hyundai design. Fiat uses Chrysler designed fours in many of its South American models.

Not really. It was a joint project with hyundai, Mitsu and DaimlerChrysler. ALL three deserve the blame for such a buzzer of a four.

 

[Bodyguard]

Most original Darts (A body Darts, not the original shorter "full sized Darts) were equipped with a slant 6 or a 273 (then 318) 2bbl and most were likely 4 doors (probably most green, gold or brown it seems). Heck for a bit it was a slant 6 only car.
The 273 HiPo, 340, 383, 440 and even Hemi Darts were the exception. But these are the ones people remember now and that is the image Chrysler marketed towards rather than the dependable compact sedan most Darts were.

LOL, my buddies grandma across the street bought a brand new 72 Dart custom (72s front ends look the best I think) in medium Gold and a white vinyl top and black interior with black and white checked cloth. 225 slant six of course. I liked it, but my Dad brought home almost the same week his brand new 72 Gran Torino with 351C......it was seaspray green with dark green vinyl top. The Dart was a great car but such a slug with the six. I love earth tones and glad at least one or two cars come in them now. Luxury Brown is nice as well as Fords Kodiak Brown.

 

[Bodyguard]

They do have one in the pipeline. It is internally known as the Hurricane.
http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2013/09/autonews-scoops-hurricane

Engine development doesn't happen overnight, especially if you want to get it right. It appears like Chrysler decided to go after the markets where they were currently competative, so they wouldn't fall behind there. They couldn't fall much farther behind than they already were in the small car market.

Cool, thanks for the info!

 

[Bodyguard]

Original is at The Chrysler World Gas Engines (WGE) (with TigerShark) http://www.allpar.com/mopar/world-engine.html#ixzz2r92jaPf6
Follow us: @allparcom on Twitter | allparcom on Facebook

Please note all participants in these forums have access to the articles on Chrysler's history and technology. There was a major redoing of the WGE which brought about the Tigershark fours. A lack of knowledge about the differences between the generations of engines and the changes made is evidenced by the blanket statements concerning NVH. There are also a number of influences on NVH specific to individual vehicles. It's not just the motor itself in isolation. As an example, Chrysler had major reduction in the NVH levels on the Neon (which started in the 1998 MY) without making any major changes to the motor.

That is all true and there has been an improvement with NVH in the Tigershark for sure....BUT with all what they have done with it, it is now barely competitive in that area. With all this discussion (I drove a Dart with 2.0 a few months ago) about the 2.4 I wanted to drive one. So yesterday my buddy and I went up the road to the Roseville automall and I drove a SXT 2.4. Just like before I liked it quite a bit. It had plenty of power, even though I am used to more torque from my PT Turbo. When I started it up, it was very quiet, the same when I pulled out into the loop that the dealers are on. It was quiet, shifted nice at low speed, just like the 2.0 I drove. When I stepped on it, it took right off but as soon as it hit around 4600 RPM or so, on came the honking and buzzing. There is only so much that can be done with an engine like the Tigershark and Dodge has done pretty well with what they had to work with. Since AutoWest also has a Honda dealership just about 1000 feet down the road we went there and drove a Civic. The Civic was easier to see out of which I really liked but I thought the Dart steered and rode better along with a much nicer interior. The Dart was also faster by a lot. But the engine was night and day smoother and sounded so much better. I dont think I would buy one but I can see how somebody would like the Honda better.

 

[Bodyguard]

How often does someone hit 4600 rpm?

A good point, it depends on the type of driver and situation......that is why I was careful to notice how the Dart seemed at just normal around town speeds and freeway driving at low RPM in high gear. Like I said, it was fine around town. But when one needed power to merge, like any NA small engine, it needs to rev and when it does, its sounds not good. Its not horrible by any means but it just was not as nice sounding as the Civic I drove later on.

Having never driven the Dart I can't say for sure. But many of these smaller engines (and to an extent most modern engines) need to wind up higher than the redline would have been in engines 30 years ago.
It looks like max torque is at 4600 RPM, max HP at 6400 RPM.

One reason why turbos are getting so popular.....high torque at lower RPM, The turbo 2.4 I have rarely needs to go above 4500, even when I need to scoot a bit...it makes its torque down low and has a flat curve. When I still had my Stratus ES 2.5 its 6500 redline made it seem like it was really screaming to my ears. I was raised with big lazy V8s and really dont like a low torque engine. Just what one is used too I guess.

Cool, thanks for the info!

I just took the time to read up on the Hurricane. Its just a revamped 2.0 like the Tigershark is a revamped 2.4. I am not hopeful actually after actually driving a Tigershark yesterday.

 

[Bodyguard]

My brother is the same. He loves his. He's had it since May and has about 36,000 miles on it averaging 35+mpg.

If I were in the market, the reason I wouldn't choose a Dart is the lack of hatchback. Mileage isn't as much of a concern to me and I like the Uconnect system better than the Sync, but I'd probably end up with a Focus hatchback.

I agree.....after having the PT, a small car with a trunk is something I dont want. SYNC in its current form is very nice and works great. (Father in law has a Mustang 5.0 with it), When it is with MFT then I am not interested..... SYNC I like, but MFT in its first gen I dont like. I have UConnect on my PT (2007) and it works well, but it takes a while to get it set up and requires a lot of steps to change settings. Just like SYNC, it has much improved over the years.

 

[Bodyguard]

After all these years, STILL the fave car I ever had in my line of work.

I remember seeing the Daytona on the cover of Car and Driver back in 84(?) and thinking what a really nice looking car. I thought (and still do) that calling the turbo "Turbo Z" was pretty silly but I sure liked how the car looked inside and out.

 

[Bodyguard]

Was unaware Cherokee was on a new platform, not entirely surprised. Sergio has proven rather flexible about many things.

Especially the truth.