[sebring96hbg]

I was talking about the photoshop of the LED surrounding the dash

As a Dart owner you know they "enhanced" the look of the LED in the pictures

It does not bother me as much as it may others. It has a more subtle, complementary effect to a nicely done interior.

 

[Stratuscaster]

Really? Going The Knob(c) in the Durango instead of the lever like the Jeep?

Not The Knob(C). The Knob(TM).

(But yes, Durango gets it.)

 

[superduckie5000]

The new Durango taillamp assembly is comprised of about 200 LED's.

A New Worlds Record ?

TMD :thumbsup:

 

[Stratuscaster]

On the front clip, the crosshair appears to float and the vertical element of the crosshair tapers from top to bottom.

So...similar to the Viper.

 

[oh2o]

So...similar to the Viper.

More similar to the current Durango. The grille perimeter shape is unchanged. The cross hair is less pronounced (thinner) and it is not filled in (meaning you can see the grille mesh behind the crosshair. The headlamp perimeter shape is also unchanged, although the lights have been restyled with an LED strip on the bottom and curving up the side a little ("hockey stick" shape).

 

[marlon_jbt]

("hockey stick" shape).

:lol:

 

[Stratuscaster]

What I meant was the way the vertical part of the crosshair on the Viper is wider at the top then tapers closer together at the bottom.

 

[uglyvaliant]

Here's a vehicle that I'd actually like to see lowered. Strikes me as a lowered (not slammed or with oversize wheels) RWD Durango would essentially be a modern reincarnation of a C-body wagon :thumbsup:

 

[sebring96hbg]

What I meant was the way the vertical part of the crosshair on the Viper is wider at the top then tapers closer together at the bottom.

It is not as pronounced as the Viper, more subtle yet noticeable. The headlights appear unique to the Durango, at least on R/T. The front is nicely done.


Edit: I removed the second sentence. I was fooled by a highly reflective surface.

 

[RVC]

I believe someone stated they were LED light tubes, similar to what BMW uses... tho I wouldn't be surprised if they just photoshopped them for effect.

Those little rings BMW uses are incredibly expensive and fragile; doubt they'd use them on the Durango.

EDIT: oops, should have read further about it being 200 LEDs, sorry.

 

[dodgeatheart]

I sat in the JGC and the Durango back-to-back yesterday at the local car show. I can't believe the sell more JGCs than Durangos. I thought the Durango was leaps and bounds better. I guess personal preference.

It's a shame the diesel isn't coming to the Durango.

 

[MoparNorm]

I sat in the JGC and the Durango back-to-back yesterday at the local car show. I can't believe the sell more JGCs than Durangos. I thought the Durango was leaps and bounds better. I guess personal preference.

It's a shame the diesel isn't coming to the Durango.

In not sure about leaps and bounds, since they both run down the same line and use the same workers and share many parts.
The Durango however is very nice and doesn't have the baggage of pretending its an off road vehicle, as does the GC.
I've been in the 'Black and Tan' and it's awesome.
What I believe hurts the Durango in sales, is its percentage of old core buyer, who bought it because it was a Dodge truck.
The whole Unitbody, independent suspension thing has turned them off, because they wanted cargo and towing ability and they simply haven't come to trust the IS to do that.
They may yet warm to it, but the cost combined with doubt is keeping the traditional Dodge truck buyer away for now.

 

[jerseyjoe]

Fiat is a Fiat? There isn't a Fiat version of this vehicle.

Mike

I know Mike, just a hangover from a different topic.

 

[Mike V.]

I know Mike, just a hangover from a different topic.

Okie dokie

 

[dodgeatheart]

In not sure about leaps and bounds, since they both run down the same line and use the same workers and share many parts.
The Durango however is very nice and doesn't have the baggage of pretending its an off road vehicle, as does the GC.
I've been in the 'Black and Tan' and it's awesome.
What I believe hurts the Durango in sales, is its percentage of old core buyer, who bought it because it was a Dodge truck.
The whole Unitbody, independent suspension thing has turned them off, because they wanted cargo and towing ability and they simply haven't come to trust the IS to do that.
They may yet warm to it, but the cost combined with doubt is keeping the traditional Dodge truck buyer away for now.

My first test when I sit in something is to sit in the driver's seat. I adjust and get comfortable there and then get out and sit behind "myself." The Durango passed this test with flying colors. The JGC failed, which I was quite surprised at considering they supposedly added 3 inches or so to the 2nd row. I understand about sharing parts but the Durango just seems to be better designed than the JGC. Like I said, personal preference. I would throw the Durango in the mix to replace my wife's Highlander if it weren't for MPG (we want an improvement!). A diesel would help, the v6 just doesn't give me the improvement I would like.

 

[Stratuscaster]

MSN Autos lists the rear legroom of the '14 Grand Cherokee as 38.6 inches, while it lists the '13 Durango's rear legroom as... 38.6 inches. :huh:

Durango's wheelbase is 5 inches longer, and overall length is 10 inches longer, than Grand Cherokee.

 

[Mike V.]

MSN Autos lists the rear legroom of the '14 Grand Cherokee as 38.6 inches, while it lists the '13 Durango's rear legroom as... 38.6 inches. :huh:

Durango's wheelbase is 5 inches longer, and overall length is 10 inches longer, than Grand Cherokee.

Dodge says 38.6". All the length is in the 31.5" of third row legroom.

Mike

 

[CDJSalesPro]

Dodge says 38.6". All the length is in the 31.5" of third row legroom.

Mike

translation.......the second row of the Grand Cherokee and Durango are identical.........

 

[UN4GTBL]

I don't remember, does the middle row of the Durango slide forwards and backwards? Maybe that's what happened?

 

[JRS200x]

My first test when I sit in something is to sit in the driver's seat. I adjust and get comfortable there and then get out and sit behind "myself." The Durango passed this test with flying colors. The JGC failed, which I was quite surprised at considering they supposedly added 3 inches or so to the 2nd row. I understand about sharing parts but the Durango just seems to be better designed than the JGC. Like I said, personal preference. I would throw the Durango in the mix to replace my wife's Highlander if it weren't for MPG (we want an improvement!). A diesel would help, the v6 just doesn't give me the improvement I would like.

Umm, the second row in the Grand Cherokee and the Durango are identical. There is no difference whatsoever in leg room. Something there is amiss. Furthermore, they are both of identical quality imo (though the Grand Cherokee is a little more luxurious in its top trim package) which is VERY GOOD. It sounds to me like you just like Dodge better than Jeep.

I don't remember, does the middle row of the Durango slide forwards and backwards? Maybe that's what happened?

No, it is stationary just like the GC. They are identical as far as legroom and space for the second row goes.