Dodge Avenger
Last Updated:
Same engines as the new Sebring.
It’s kind of growing on me.
Especially after visiting the Chrysler Sebring website.
The pictures on the site are horrible.
Chrysler picked the worse photographers and Photoshop people in the business.
I haven’t seen the car yet, but the pictures on the site make it look super cheap and ugly.
This one can only be better.
Vince, I concur with your conclusion: It grows on you(especially after looking at that train wreck called the Sebring).
The spouse was not impressed( still likes the tC. It is a decent car).
Still… this could be interesting(I agree with a few people I spoke to; this should have been a coupe, or some kind of 3 door sporty hatch, instead of a sedan. I had heard new rumors of a coupe in 08, of this vehicle…Vince?).
Anyhow…. I’ll most likely(at the very least) test drive one of ’em early next year.
It is acceptable(but like you tol dme awhile back, our tC interior is light years ahead of this thing, or should be…and that is the sticking point).
If they are suing their own tranny on this thing, No Thanks.
Heard too many horror stories about trannies failing at 90-100K.
My Inlaws had a 99 Jeep grand Cherokee Laredo… at 107,000, tranny died. He paid 3000+ at Local garage(not Dodge/Chrysler), to get it replaced.
He got it used 2 years ago, had it 1 year, and the tranny died. He owed more than the tranny work had cost him, so he fixed it, and kept it. .
He also said they had a recall(?) about ABS, if you lived where salt is put onto icy/snowy roads, could corrode something and make the ABS not work(rust out prematurely)?
Still not 100% “confident” in their vehicles
At the rate their going, we’ll be seeing tail fins pretty soon. All they need to do on this one is raise the fenders a couple of inches and leave the trunk lid where it is.
Vince, THIS is a good looking car. However, this is the RT version.
Now imagine it with 15″ wheels, plastic hubcaps and no body ground effects….. get’s kinda ugly huh?
I think all of Chrysler/Dodge stylists have either quit or are high. The only good looking car in the entire stable is the 300/Magnum wagon.
Looks WAAAAAY better than the Sebring. Seriously, did they have the Pontiac Aztek people design the new Sebring?
I am a toyota employee….you have no chance, soon we will own the world!
This design reminds me of a 1990 Nissan Maxima SE. This car looks real good.
The idiotic blunt nosed styling will kill this car the same way its killing the smaller Caliber: HORRIBLE FUEL ECONOMY.
28/32 for the 1.8 and 2.0 litre
23/26 for the 2.4 litre!
The heavier avenger will be even worse! Who would buy a car like this with their own money when a standard accord can do 26/34?
DUMB DUMB DUMB
The low economy on the Caliber is partially due to the fact that it has AWD, which lowers economy by a fair amount on all cars (look at the CRV 2WD vs 4WD, etc…)…
I’m not a Dodge supporter, (I actually drive an 06 Accord Automatic I-4 and average 30 MPG) so I know where you are coming from!
All the Caliber fuel economy numbers posted above are for the FWD only models.
If you want good fuel econmy, there are plenty of other cars to choose from. Not everyone buys a car for the fuel economy, and not everyone wants a mid-size car with a 4 cyl engine. About the only people who buy mid-size cars with a 4 cyl engines are old people.
This style has become so derivative. While it’s good that Dodge has a look of it’s own, this one-style-different-sizes way of designing cars is getting old quickly.
Well, it is way better looking than the Sebring. I hope they give it a vastly improved interior than the garbage we’re seeing from Chrysler in their new cars these days.
i think it is nice looking, a mix of the old stratus and the charger, i think it will sell well, the caliber is selling really well, the charger has been a decent success, and dodge is doing the mercedes thing different cars same look which isnt a negative, not for those who look at cars as appliances, or stealth dont look at me ways to get around, but maybe for the mazda 6, altima, or person that just thinks the fullsize charger is to large not accord camry crowd
“About the only people who buy mid-size cars with a 4 cyl engines are old people.”
Must be a ton of old people out there, either that or you’re just plain wrong.
Fact is, the majority of midsize sedans are bought with 4 cyl engines. For example, most Accords and Camrys are bought with 4 cyl engines.
Looks like something a redneck, NASCAR fan would drive.
Not classy at all.
“Fact is, the majority of midsize sedans are bought with 4 cyl engines. For example, most Accords and Camrys are bought with 4 cyl engines.”
Yeah, and most are driven by old people because they won’t spend the extra scratch for an over-priced V6 Camry or Accord. Take note.
In these cars, people mostly go with the 4 cylinder not because they are “old”.
It is because the 4s from Honda and Toyota are super smooth, quiet and fast enough for people who actually drive.
160hp is plenty in a midsize car.
Plus the mileage is better.
I drove the new Camry with a 4 and it was an excellent car. Sure the V6 is better (and overpriced)
But the 4 is so good, why bother.
This has nothing to do with age.Jut plain good sense.
Almost 450 000 people buy a Camry every year, and they’re not all retired you know.
Have you actually driven any of these cars?
Yes in fact I have, and I’ll take a V6 over a 4 any day. As smooth as a 4 might be, it’ll never match that of a V6. Maybe to you 160hp is plenty, but I’ll take more, thank you very much. Since I actually drive, not simply go from point A to point B.
Anonymous said…
Maybe to you 160hp is plenty, but I’ll take more, thank you very much. Since I actually drive, not simply go from point A to point B.
And to quote Jeff Foxworthy, you might be a redneck.
“And to quote Jeff Foxworthy, you might be a redneck.”
Over 160 hp too much for you to handle? You must be one of those old people.
Anonymous said…
Over 160 hp too much for you to handle? You must be one of those old people.
I never said it was too much to handle. You did.
For most people, a car is an appliance, not some instrument with which to prove themselves. Some of us feel that using less gasoline is a smart choice for so many reasons. Good, modern 4-cylinders do the job just fine. I only wish domestic brands cared enough to make a decent one.
The Avenger is styled (and perhaps engined) for people who can’t handle that their penis is as small as it actually is.
Gee, thanks for the advice Dr. Freud. I find it amusing how some feel the need to associate penis size with driving. Maybe they’re trying to hide their own, er, shortcomings.
There are plenty of ways to be energy-efficient, and modern high performance engines are a lot more efficient than their predecessors. Plus for some of us, driving is still fun, a passion if you will, and we enjoy driving cars that are more than just some appliance to go fetch groceries. We don’t feel the need to “prove” ourselves when behind the wheel, but we do enjoy the pleasure of driving. It’s those pathetic envirokooks who think their Prius or Kia is going to save the world who are trying to prove themselves.
Anonymous said…
Gee, thanks for the advice Dr. Freud.
You are most welcome, but thank Chrysler for its Avenger. After all, it’s what got you all wet.
—Anonymous said…
—There are plenty of ways to be energy-efficient
Yes there are plenty but would you please tell us how when you’re demanding more horsepower and larger displacement? It seems you are being hypocritical.
Anonymous said…
I find it amusing how some feel the need to associate pen*s size with driving. Maybe they’re trying to hide their own, er, shortcomings.
You find it amusing, yet you made it about your pen*s size. Okay, whatever. You’re the George Bush of WMDs.
Now, back to the Avenger. It’s somewhat an improvement over the Sebring, but why not make it an Accord/Camry competitor instead of a rental wannabe? That is the real point…or is it about your tiny pen*s?