2007 Dodge Avenger (Very Impressive!)

[YSSMAN]

Answer me this then. Lets say, theoretically of course, the new Camaro comes back as a FWD V6 sedan. You'd be ok with that right, because the name is what brings people in??? I mean, no one cares that it used to be a fun coupe with lots of power and attitude. It would be fine as a timid sedan, because people totally LOVE the name Camaro.

Or, again theoretically, what if Jaguar were to come out with a new 4-door wagon, and they called it the E-Type. The name is all that matters, so that would be fine, right??? I mean, the original E-Type is one of the greatest cars of all time. That name alone would sell the hell out of some wagons.

Forgive me if I don't agree with you.

Hilg

I know what you are talking about and I can see where you are comming from, but you are going beyond rational thinking here. Although Ford nearly replaced the Mustang with the FWD Probe (although it is questionable if it would have been the Mustang or the Probe), it never happened. Why? Ford was smart and saw what would happen if they did. General Motors, or even DaimlerChrysler for that matter are smart enough not to completely destroy what a particular name represents... Although Chrysler does have a history of throwing names like Daytona, Charger, Duster, etc around.

Being sensible, most automakers work things out quite well when it comes to reviving a nameplate from the past. Granted there are plenty of examples which may not have lived up to it's predecessors that carried the same name, there are many that have done well overall.

What it comes down to is copyrights, marketing, and product recognition. While a name like "Avenger" may not ring through the halls of everyone's mind, the name does hold a special place in many Mopar fan's hearts. The switch to the Stratus permanantly wasn't a good thing, and the switch back to Avenger brings some more "ooph" to the model as a whole.

...Now it could be argued that they could have come up with a better name, but would you care to suggest one? Often times it takes months to develop a new name for a car or truck, particularly one that will sit well with the public (take the LaCrosse as an example, wouldn't fly in Canada)... Why not go with a name that has some meaning, is flexible, and won't require massive ammounts of campaigning?

Throwing names around for naming sake isn't a good thing, but when you are building a car that is both pysically and spiritually the successor to the given model, why come up with something entirely new? The Avenger may not live up to your standards as a car with two-doors only, but given that DCX likes to bend the rules, they sould be plenty successful selling the car both in two-door and four-door formats, Avenger name included.

 

[JNasty4G63]

I know what you are talking about and I can see where you are comming from, but you are going beyond rational thinking here.

Am I?? You really think that???

General Motors, or even DaimlerChrysler for that matter are smart enough not to completely destroy what a particular name represents.

Really??? Then what can explain this...???
Going from this.... (300F)

....to this. (300M)

Now sure, that is just one example. But honestly, thats ridiculous. The old 300 cars were all nice big coupe/convertibles with big V8 engines and RWD layout. But then, trying to be all nostalgic, they thought making the new 300M as a 4-door, V6 powered, FWD sedan would be ok. It wasn't. At least the new 300 is RWD, and available with a V8, but you see my point.

While a name like "Avenger" may not ring through the halls of everyone's mind, the name does hold a special place in many Mopar fan's hearts.....and the switch back to Avenger brings some more "ooph" to the model as a whole.

See, I think you are looking at this from the wrong direction. You are saying that people are going to want to buy this car just because of the name. I think that is the last thing on their mind. I have no idea how old you are, but I'm 28 years old, and was that prime age of 16 when the original Avenger came out. And I can tell you, it was NOT the name that piqued my interest in the car. It was the fact that it was a very sleek, fun, some-what aggressive looking car. The name was fine, but it was just a cool car.

This new Avenger is not that. If you go to a high school or college these days and show some kids a picture of this, and a pic of the new Civic coupe, which do you think would garner more attention and appeal. Now, again, I'm not saying the car is ugly or anything like that. I just don't think the car is going to be this HUGE hit just because its got a throwback name.

Now it could be argued that they could have come up with a better name, but would you care to suggest one?

No, not my job. With an entire Marketing department, and well over 600,000 words in the English language alone, it shouldn't be hard to find a few new ones to use.

Throwing names around for naming sake isn't a good thing, but when you are building a car that is both pysically and spiritually the successor to the given model, why come up with something entirely new?

Well, it is very much NOT physically related, and I'd venture to say its not even that spiritually related either. The shape and look are self-explanatory really. But, I don't see the spirit either.

The original car was sold as the fun, sporty alternative to the "Cloud Cars" of that era. If you wanted something moderately priced, but didn't want the bland-ness of the Stratus, Cirrus or Breeze, you could get the Avenger or Sebring. Very similar price to the 4-door cars, but with a much more fun, sporty look and feel to them. But this new one has none of that. It just looks like you can't afford the Charger, so you had to settle for that.

I do agree with you though. It probably will sell fairly well. The original Avenger didn't exactly sell by the millions, so its not like it has this huge following of people who are anxiously awaiting it. So, to most people, its just going to be another car. But to me, and apparently quite a few other people, the car is just one more strike for DC with their faux-retro/nostalgia naming scheme.

Hilg

 

[TopHat]

Sure, whatever but you have to realize that there is a 40 year difference between the 300F and the 300 M.



It's just not the same as 5 or 10 years as on the Avenger and the Camaro, now, if the camaro was to come back as a FWD v-6 sedan, there would be riots in the streets, and the Avenger on a sedan is a new life for the less than spectacular (imo) origingal avenger, so ,NO ITS NOT THE SAME THING.

 

[High-Test]

The dip in the trunk and hoodline makes it look more like what a new Dart would look like instead of a mini charger.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Sure, whatever but you have to realize that there is a 40 year difference between the 300F and the 300 M.

So, what your saying is, 40 years is long enough that they figure we would all have forgotten that the 300 cars used to be coupes, rear drive and available with V8 engines, right??? I don't think so.

I'm not just talking about the new versus old with the cars. Obviously, a car made back in the early 60s and a car made in the 21st century are going to look quite different. But, its almost like they didn't even think about it when they made the 300M. It was name only, nothing else. And, it failed, miserably. Thus, the "new" 300C finally went back to V8s and RWD. Thats close enough. But the 300M was just not even slightly close.

And seriously, enough with the "dunce" stuff and name calling. So what if I don't like this car or it's name?? I didn't say anything about you personally. Its just silly, so stop. I'm just trying to have a normal discussion about the car.

Hilg

 

[TopHat]

Ok, I see what you are talking about, but it wouldn't be the same because not everyone has heard of the 300 letter sieries, an example would be any one younger than 25 or so, who pays no attention to the history of cars.

BUT, the camaro has been in production up until 2002, so most people know what it is, so It passes on the 300M, but not on the recently discontinued Camaro.

AND, (caps = authority) I removed the ever hurting dunce. AND AND, I feel stoopid

 

[JNasty4G63]

Ok, I see what you are talking about, but it wouldn't be the same because not everyone has heard of the 300 letter sieries, an example would be any one younger than 25 or so, who pays no attention to the history of cars.

See, I don't buy that. Just because the car hasn't been in production for a while doesn't mean it didn't ever exist. The GTO wasn't around for quite some time, but GM at least got the basics right on the car. The car itself might not have been totally thought-out completely. But at least it was a V8 RWD Coupe, like the old Goats.

I just don't like it when auto makers do this. Just because the Avenger wasn't a big seller in sporty coupe form shouldn't mean you need to try and bring back the name as a whole different car. I liked the original Avenger. It didn't sell well, so thats fine, I'm ok with it not being around anymore. Don't taint the name by completely changing it.

But, the 300 cars were very popular back in the day. What they should have done is save the "300" name for the Crossfire. It was a RWD coupe/convertible, so thats good. And, the old SLK chassis that it shared would accept a V8, so that would have helped as well. That would have been great. They could have just called the "New 300" the New Yorker, Imperial, or Newport. Then at least, the cars would be sticking to what they were.

AND, (caps = authority) I removed the ever hurting dunce. AND AND, I feel stoopid

👍
Thanks. Its just discussion. No need to get all fired up.

Hilg

 

[TopHat]

yeah thats what most people would think.

Ask and 12-15 year old boy/girl, they have ('cept for me) NO idea about older cars. Of course, save the Mustang and the Camaro.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Ask and 12-15 year old boy/girl, they have ('cept for me) NO idea about older cars. Of course, save the Mustang and the Camaro.

True, but something tells me people under the age of 16 aren't exactly very high up on the "target demographic" priority list when designing cars.

Hilg

 

[Tornado]

I would like to know what all the arguing about destroying brand names is is. Its not like the old Avenger was a good car in any stretch of the imagination, attractive though it may have been (I don't think so. There was about a foot too much front overhang). But this Avenger looks like somone did a slight mid-cycle boy refreshening on a Charger. It looks almost exactly like some Charger that someone did a body kit to. That being said, it will almost certainly be a better car than the old one.
In addition, this arguing about whether it should be a coupe like it's predecessor it moot at best. Midsize coupes simply do not sell. Even Toyota has given up hope, leaving only the GM twins in the mix.

 

[JNasty4G63]

I would like to know what all the arguing about destroying brand names is is. Its not like the old Avenger was a good car in any stretch of the imagination....

Its not so much this car, as it is the car business as a WHOLE that is in question.

In addition, this arguing about whether it should be a coupe like it's predecessor it moot at best.

Again, I don't really want it to be a coupe. I just don't want it to be an Avenger. Like I've been saying, I'd rather they just come up with a new name for a new car. Like you said, and I agree with, the original car was nothing special. It was a decent car, but nothing to get all teary-eyed about when it left. But like I was saying with the 300M, to bring back the name on a car that is so unrelated is just lame. Thats my point.

Hilg

 

[YSSMAN]

Midsize coupes simply do not sell. Even Toyota has given up hope, leaving only the GM twins in the mix.

Well even then, the Monte Carlo is on life-support as it is right now. After cutting the LT and LTZ models (with the 3.9L V6) out of the mix, they are left with the Grandma-spec "LT" with the 3.5L V6 and the SS with the 5.3L V8. Added to that, the outlook on a Monte Carlo replacement isn't looking good, although GM and the news has not necessiarily pointed to a complete cancelation of the car.

However I would be willing to bet that if they dropped the Monte Carlo name and slapped on a Chevelle badge, they could sell a lot more... Of course it would have to come after the switch to the Zeta platfrom (thus RWD), and styling would have to call back to the '69 Chevelle SS, argueably the most famous of all the Chevelle models.

 

[harrytuttle]

Again, I don't really want it to be a coupe. I just don't want it to be an Avenger. Like I've been saying, I'd rather they just come up with a new name for a new car. Like you said, and I agree with, the original car was nothing special. It was a decent car, but nothing to get all teary-eyed about when it left. But like I was saying with the 300M, to bring back the name on a car that is so unrelated is just lame. Thats my point.

Hilg

I hardly think there's many people who owned an Avenger who could call it "a decent car". The current 300C is a great return to form for the 300's of old. The 300M looked okay, but it was no 300. This new Avenger is probably going to be a better car than the last Avenger (which shouldn't be hard to do).

Stylistically speaking, however, the car has some nice features, but all of those features are xeroxes of the Charger. Don't confuse this with Dodge creating a "family look". BMW has a family look and it consists of two primary features: the Hofmeister kink, and the kidney grille. That's it. Everything else is fair game. Dodge had it right about 5 years ago with the crosshair grille; there was no mistaking what car was behind you, be it Viper or Avenger. But this is something that Aston Martin is intimately familiar with: plagiarism.

 

[JNasty4G63]

I hardly think there's many people who owned an Avenger who could call it "a decent car".....This new Avenger is probably going to be a better car than the last Avenger (which shouldn't be hard to do).

The mother of my girlfriend back in high school owned a then brand new Sebring. She got to take it out on many occasions when we would hang out, so I spent a very considerable ammount of time in one. Like I said before, the car was not ground breaking, but it was a very nice car. Fun, sporty, and looked great.

The current 300C is a great return to form for the 300's of old.

Well, they at least got the RWD and V8 thing right. I still think the "New 300" should have been called the Imperial, and the Crossfire called the 300. Both would have stuck to past form, and would have been great modern interpretations of the previous models.

BMW has a family look and it consists of two primary features: the Hofmeister kink, and the kidney grille. That's it. Everything else is fair game.

I think these days, BMW has more of a "Family Feel" rather than a "Look" that they share. Call it the "Bangle" effect or whatever you like, they all have a certain modern, yet very flowing technical look to them. I love it, and I've been ridiculed for saying that on many occasions. No matter how "unconventional" people say they look, they never look like anything but a BMW. The "feel" is just there, and it works.

Hilg

 

[harrytuttle]

The mother of my girlfriend back in high school owned a then brand new Sebring. She got to take it out on many occasions when we would hang out, so I spent a very considerable ammount of time in one. Like I said before, the car was not ground breaking, but it was a very nice car. Fun, sporty, and looked great.

What's the reference point, though? "Fun" compared to what? Also, a Sebring has exactly what to do with an Avenger?

Well, they at least got the RWD and V8 thing right. I still think the "New 300" should have been called the Imperial, and the Crossfire called the 300. Both would have stuck to past form, and would have been great modern interpretations of the previous models.

I could see that (forgot that old 300's were 2-door), except the Crossfire is too small. Not that there really were any small Chrysler's back then, though.

I think these days, BMW has more of a "Family Feel" rather than a "Look" that they share. Call it the "Bangle" effect or whatever you like, they all have a certain modern, yet very flowing technical look to them. I love it, and I've been ridiculed for saying that on many occasions. No matter how "unconventional" people say they look, they never look like anything but a BMW. The "feel" is just there, and it works.

Right: it's a style, not a near-perfect match. These current BMW's are far different from each other than they were in the late 90's, but I guess you can only do "boxy but classy" so many ways. Current Audi & just-previous Mercedes cars are good examples of what Chrysler is doing now: almost anonymous amongst a crowd of siblings. It stands out as a Dodge/Chrysler, but no specific model.

 

[JNasty4G63]

What's the reference point, though? "Fun" compared to what?

Fun compared to who cares what, it doesn't matter. I was 16. It was a nice car. It was a coupe, which is undoubtedly cool at that age. It was pretty quick with the V6, which is also cool. Plus, it had leather, a sunroof and the Infinity sound system, which made for a pretty nice car in its day. Now, if you want to compare things, I guess compared to a Mustang GT or Z28, no it wouldn't be as fun. But, as a very nice, good looking and sporty car, it did very well.

Also, a Sebring has exactly what to do with an Avenger?

💡
Uh, because they are the same car, thats why. The original Avenger was the same exact car as the original Sebring. Just one was a Dodge, and the other a Chrysler. This has always been the story, even when they switched the Avenger to the Stratus Coupe. The Stratus Coupe and Sedan were the same exact car as the Sebring Coupe and Sedan. Thus, when I said I spent a good deal of time in an original Sebring, and know what kind of car it was, it could be reasoned that I also know what the Avenger was like.

Hilg

1995 Avenger

1995 Sebring

2002 Stratus Coupe

2002 Sebring Coupe

2002 Stratus Sedan

2002 Sebring Sedan

 

[harrytuttle]

Fun compared to who cares what, it doesn't matter. I was 16. It was a nice car. It was a coupe, which is undoubtedly cool at that age. It was pretty quick with the V6, which is also cool. Plus, it had leather, a sunroof and the Infinity sound system, which made for a pretty nice car in its day. Now, if you want to compare things, I guess compared to a Mustang GT or Z28, no it wouldn't be as fun. But, as a very nice, good looking and sporty car, it did very well.

Ah. I see. It's in reference to nothing. I've been the same way. Early on I drove some truly uninspiring (and sometimes awful cars) that I was completely thrilled to have at the time. I have nostalgic feelings about them now, but none of them are memories of the drive itself being very fun.

💡
Uh, because they are the same car, thats why. The original Avenger was the same exact car as the original Sebring. Just one was a Dodge, and the other a Chrysler. This has always been the story, even when they switched the Avenger to the Stratus Coupe. The Stratus Coupe and Sedan were the same exact car as the Sebring Coupe and Sedan. Thus, when I said I spent a good deal of time in an original Sebring, and know what kind of car it was, it could be reasoned that I also know what the Avenger was like.

That explains why I hated the Sebring, too....