DETROIT AUTO SHOW: STUD or DUD - Does The 2013 Dodge Dart Stand A Chance Against The Civics, Sentras, Elantras And Corollas Of The World?

Interesting that most of the shots of the exterior of the car were shot in Music City (Nashville, TN) instead of Motor City.

-00J

@Agent00J

What a intellectual observation. Not! Who cares where the promotional shots were photographed or filmed? Do you seriously think every marketing campaign for each Chrysler/Fiat automobile will be located or based in Detroit?

wow, snazy little car. Seems as though chrysler is finally serious about the compact car market.

Nice italian design. But I am afraid the average compact class buyer will be far more concerned about the italian reliability.

Do you honestly think the average compact buyer knows that the car has an Italian multi-air setup or that the company has been bought out by Fiat?

Of course not, but he will get the idea from the reliability ratings 1-2 years down the road.

looks great, way way way way way better than a Civic or Corolla hands down, not sure how well made or durable they are...

Dual Exhausts, Optional Twin-Clutch, clean design. They're not going to be able to make enough of them.

Wow! This will easily the best looking sub-compact on the market. The various mechanical and technology specs seem great also. But if I were a current 2011/2012 Charger owner, I would be somewhat pissed as the full LED rear lights IMO should have been an exclusive feature for this model only and not phased into the Dart.

Forget what it looks like. I'm wondering if this thing will retain any Alfa driving characteristics--wishful thinking. And yeah, will it be reliable ?

It should retain Alfa driving characteristics(especially the RT). The platform(other then being a little wider and longer), suspension, and electric steering are the same as the Giulietta. It really gets down to the tuning of the suspension. I'm guessing the base suspension will be a little softer then the Giulietta's but the RT should be on par or even firmer.Also being a wider track (about 2 inches) should help with handling and stability. I think the front and rear ends of the car are pure Dodge. However, the overall shape(sideview) is very European and can easily translate into a future Fiat, Alfa, or Lancia without a lot of physical alterations. The engine choices look to be promising as well. It has been said that Fiat has worked hard on refining the 2.0 4 so it should sound a lot better. Better yet is the 2.4 4 with multiar. Even the 1.4 turbo has more torque then the Euro version. This should be a very competative car against the Focus, Cruze, and Elantra.

Chrysler hasn't made anything decent looking in 20 years with the exception of the Crossfire (which looked good, but was a dog). They should either hang it up or fire everyone and hire Hyundai employees to help them out. What an eyesore.

Sales figures for the 300, Charger and Challenger would suggest otherwise. The new Grand Cherokee is also a great looking vehicle, as is the Durango for its size.

The Crossfire was a rebadged SLK. It was built in Germany by Mercedes. The interiors were identical except the Crossfire has different color dash and different gauge writing. Nice looking car. resemlbes the elantras lines from the sides. Interior looks great. Not bad at all. If this car were RWD it would be the best compact on the market hands down. Chrysler ought to make a move to all RWD cars with optional AWD. No-one would be able to compete on the handling and balance aspect.

MorePower - I agree the Jeep is a nice looking vehicle, but I hardly consider that a part of Chrysler. I consider it a success only because Chrysler didn't mess with it too much.

As to the Charger and Challenger, sales are okay, but Chrysler has been bailed out twice by the U.S. government and once by Fiat. Hardly the mark of a company that is producing desirable cars.

85bmw745i - The Crossfire was a nice car to look at, that's what I said. It was not a nice car to drive. It was underpowered and sluggish. To say not bad is to suggest the car was okay, it was not. They nailed interior and exterior and then totally effed up the driving dynamics to create a loser.

Ferrari was bailed out by the Italian government, does that mean their cars are not desirable? Being bailed out by a government is not a symptom of bad design or undesirable cars, it is a symptom of gross mismanagement!

Chrysler had to be bailed out because Mercedes gave it to them and then dumped them off on the curb in the morning.

I applaud your enthusiasm, but you are grossly misinformed.

LJ745. In reply to your comment the Jeep was created by Chrysler and built by Chrysler using a chassis from Merc. Chrysler was bailed out only once by the Government. The loans Chrysler received in the early 80s were fronted by the public sector but backed by the Gov. hence Government backed loans. Currently Fiat bought into Chrysler which is not a bailout. And BTW the actual bailout was not caused by undesirable vehicles, It was caused by Diamlers pillaging business tactics.

bfghemicuda - Chrysler would have failed if not for Fiat. One man's government backed loan is another man's bailout, so your argument falls a bit short there. BTW, your analysis of the bailout is opinion and not fact, so I don't really care. When you can present evidence for the cause of the failure, then we'll talk. My point about Jeep was that the brand was around long before Chrysler got involved. They nearly killed it when they first got their hands on it. As I said, I agree that brand makes some nice vehicles now, but Jeep is not Chrysler even though Chrysler owns it. Jeep has its own brand image and direction, which is why the cars sell better than the ugly crap that Chrysler puts out.

MorePower - You seem to have an emotional problem when it comes to Chrysler. Yes, Ferrari made some fugly, unreliable cars for a bit and still does IMHO. Lamborghini makes far better looking cars and always has.

You can blame Mercedes if you want, but Chrysler created its own problems. It is a lackluster brand selling lackluster cars. Their only claim to fame during the 1980s and 1990s was their minivan. Not exactly the mark of a hip, well-designed, trendy brand.

LJ745 Wow, you really don't know what your talking about. And your right, you don't care. You don't care to understand.

LJ745 Lets try again to clarify. My point with the first loan, or in your term "bailout" was just that a loan and it was not on the back of the taxpayer, again Gov backed loans, Fact. Second, you are correct on the help from Fiat [in business terms it's called an investment] but my comment was aimed at the pillaging that came from Diamler that put Chrysler in trouble, Fact. Third, my point with Jeep was in concern with the new GC, it was created by Chrysler which is another Fact. BTW Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and Ram are all engineered and manufactured by Chrysler.

This car has the shape reminiscent of what a Modern Neon would have. The Caliber was simply ugly.

Is this an article about the Dodge Dart or an advertisement for the Dart?

I never quite got the Caliber. I guess Chrysler was thinking "Crossover". However I think it tied with 2 other vehicles for being one of the must ugly vehicles ever produced-The other 2 being the Pontiac Aztec and the Subaru B9 Tribeca.

Presenting....the 2013 Dodge Neon

This is definately NOT a Neon.This may be where Dodge dreamed of taking the Neon. This car seems like it will be very very competative provided Dodge doesn't muck up the driving characteristics.