Goodbye Neon

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blackbird.
  • 75 comments
  • 3,118 views
Neon was a pretty prominent name amongst domestic compact cars. I did like it lot better than Cavalier, but I don't know if that's saying much. When Focus was introduced, I think most domestic buyers lost interest in Neon. I know I did.

Caliber's face reminded me of another familiar Chrysler compact. Maybe a bit of stretch. :D

a019-calibersub_0905n_09-19-2005_T08J51P-2.jpg
dodge-omni-1985-glh.jpg


It doesn't interest me at all, but looks fairly attractive(Caliber, not Horizon/Omni).
 
Why are they making cars so ugly these days? I don't want a car that has the front-end of a frikkin' truck, for cryin' out loud. Just when everything started to get all nice and rounded, now they're back to squaring everything off. WTF?
 
Looks like a mini-magnum from the front. But why do they call it a replacement if they are pulling out of the compact car category all-together?
 
I'm disappointed.

Sure, over here is fialed when compared directly to european cars, but it was pretty, and suitably different.


RIP Neon.


By the way, are the Stratus or Intrepid still doing the rounds?
 
ultrabeat
By the way, are the Stratus or Intrepid still doing the rounds?
The Magnum/Charger replaced the Intrepid, but the Stratus is still around (shares the Galant platform I think)
 
The intriped was unstable at speed, heavy, had crap suspension, and a weak choice of engines running the wrong wheels.

It will not be missed by me, or any police officer who ever had the misfortune of driving one.

This thing, the Caliber...I don't know, maybe if they AWD/Turbocharge an SRT-4 version it would be neat.
 
Onikaze
The intriped was unstable at speed, heavy, had crap suspension, and a weak choice of engines running the wrong wheels.

It will not be missed by me, or any police officer who ever had the misfortune of driving one.
The Intrepid/LH platform was brillaint in 1993 but very, very tired in 2003.
Layzie
So does this mean no more SRT-4's too?
Yes. It will be no more, although the engine lives on in the PT cruiser GT.
 
Hmm, that sucks...I wonder what used SRT-4's are going for now...
 
ND4SPD
Hmm, that sucks...I wonder what used SRT-4's are going for now...
KBB says for 25,000 mile examples

for a 2005: $20,350
for a 2004: $17,665

A good deal but finding one that hasn't been raced/abused would be hard.
 
Is dodge just going for an all-truck lineup, now? I don't understand how you can replace a car with a truck.
 
Omnis
Is dodge just going for an all-truck lineup, now? I don't understand how you can replace a car with a truck.
It's no truck, it's a Neon-sized wagon/sportback (like the Mazda3) with the corporate truck face

This picture is more telling

 
It LOOKS like a truck, though... ugly.

I don't really like the Mazda3 hatchback.. I bought the sedan. But at least the Mazda3 has a streamlined front-end.. very similar in style to the front of an RX-8.

These new... things... will probably be popular here in Texas.. that way, people can drive a car that looks like a truck without actually having to buy a truck.
 
Well, it seems like a pretty solid car--AWD will be an option, making it a viable small SUV competitor. There will also be a Jeep version. The sedan will be the "Rebel"

Since there is interest, I'll put up the rest of the pics from allpar.com and some other info




Chrysler press release:
The signature crosshair grille gives Caliber the distinct face of Dodge and defines its strong, muscular front view. Wide, sculpted wheel forms, impressive 19-inch wheels and tires, broad shoulders and bulging hood give Caliber its proud, powerful stance. Large, crystal headlamps and fog lights complement the chrome grille and create an integrated look that completes Caliber's modular appearance.

A black graphic appliqué runs the length of the roof and melds into an integrated spoiler, creating a coupe-like quality from the side view. Dodge’s “do more” philosophy is evident in Caliber's five doors, including a rear hatch, which provide easy access to the vehicle’s spacious interior.

New and unique glass-to-body proportions give the Caliber concept a tough, protective presence. The forward sweep of the tailgate emphasizes Caliber's sporty profile. Chrome door handles and body-side moldings add a sense of style and polish that completes Caliber's machined exterior.

The rear view of the Dodge Caliber is as distinctive and powerful as the front grille. The black roof spoiler with center high-mounted stop lamp, the chrome exhaust tail pipe, and large, modular crystal taillamps that fill Caliber's rear corners provide distinct focal points of Caliber's design.


Engine Info:

# The Dodge Caliber engines, like those of the Dodge Rebel sedan/coupe, will be the 1.8 and diesel in Europe, the 2.4 in the US, and the 2.0 in both regions. A 235 horsepower turbocharged 2.4 is likely in an SRT version. The diesel engine, also used in the Volkswagen Golf range of vehicles, was apparently chosen due to cost and size; it produces a bit less horsepower than the bottom-end gas engine, but has gobs of torque available from low engine speeds (and out-torques all of the gasoline engines except perhaps the turbo). Gas mileage is expected to be excellent with this powerplant.
# The 2.4 liter naturally aspirated version will be quite potent with 170 horsepower - that's an estimate from Chrysler. All four cylinder engines will be the new world engine.
# The new cars will come with a CVT (continuously variable transmission), but with a computer programmed to mimic tradictional automatic transmissions, so customers are comfortable with the feel. AutoStick will be coupled to the CVT, which may be a first. The transmission uses two V pulleys and a steel push belt to vary the input speed to output speed ratio instead of traditional discrete gear ratios activated by clutches or bands. The transmission engages the torque converter clutch almost immediately when accelerating and keeps engaged throughout speed changes, eliminating slippage and increasing efficiency, especially in city driving. Optimized gear ratios, especially in the 30-60 mph range, improve passing and feel more responsive. Continuously varying the transmission ratio allows the engine to stay in its most efficient operating range. The CVT brings a 6-8 percent improvement in fuel economy compared with a traditional four-speed automatic.
# The supplier of the transmission is JATCO, which is owned by Nissan and Mitsubishi; the transmission is apparently a new generation of one used in current Nissans.

* Some JATCO transmissions have been very problematic, but Nissan’s current use of JATCO transmissions has been without substantial problems, indicating either that design issues were overcome or that electronic controls may have been the issue. Chrysler will be using their own unique electronics with these transmissions. The results should be interesting.
* Some would ask whether having artificial gears built into a CVT defeats the point of a CVT. Presumably there’s a reason for using a CVT - greater efficiency due to its mechanical nature (rather than going through a fluid interface)? Or perhaps the gear ratios “move” to meet current needs rather than staying at predefined locations. Hopefully more details will appear.

# Dodge Caliber uses the first electronically controlled all-wheel-drive system with variable torque output ever offered on any Chrysler Group car. An electronically controlled coupling manages torque split from front to rear with no driver input needed for smooth and automatic performance. The system works on demand, driving only the front wheels until power to the rear wheels is needed, raising fuel economy. All-wheel drive is also used between speeds of 25 and 65 mph to ensure precise handling during performance driving. (All wheel drive may not be available in Europe.)
# The 2.0-liter engine is a direct-injection turbo diesel with high-pressure fuel injection, a variable geometry turbocharger, and four valves per cylinder. The injectors are electronically controlled, allowing precise management of each combustion cycle. This system can operate at pressures up to 2000 bar, leading to finer atomization of fuel, high power and torque, and better fuel efficiency.
 
skip0110
It's no truck, it's a Neon-sized wagon/sportback (like the Mazda3) with the corporate truck face

This picture is more telling


Hideous front end...but the rest of the car look good--and the wheels look fantastic. I like the idea of the CVT tranny...that will be a different change in domestic cars.
 
The Neon needed to die, it wasn't a good car. It was like the Caviler, which GM finally realized sucked and was replaced with the 1000% better Cobalt. Dodge just replaced a crappy car with an aweful looking car. I hate Chysler, their designers are worse then 80% of GM's designers.

But like I said before the new Caliber looks like a Malibu Maxx had sex with a Magnum and this was the batard child. But it will sell great because its ugly as hell.
 
I think you're kind of biased against Chrysler, Blazin. I personally think the Chrysler engineers really pushed the envelope farther than GM and Ford, especially in the early and mid 90s. Cars like the Viper and the Prowler, although this last one was very ugly, gave a different view to the US auto industry back then. The 300C and Crossfire are also a different designs, which can be ugly to some people, but push the envelope.

Also, I have friends who are part of a Neon club and it was generally a good car. Responded quite well under pressure (we did a few laps on some tracks) and achieved a good speed on straights (untuned).

Anyhow, if there will be a SRT-4 version of this thing in 2007, will it be srt-4? I mean, does this monster of a car really carry a 4-cylinder engine? It looks like it ought to carry a 6 at least.
 
Pushing the envelope makes for ugly cars. And I'm not biased because I think GM sucks at a lot of their designs as well as Ford.

The Neon wasn't terriable looking , just bland like it was supposed to be.
The Dodge line up of trucks are uglier then the GM line of trucks...which is pretty damn hideous.
The Durango is terriably ugly.
The Pacifica is so poorly designed with its huge body, huge blind spots, and tiny mirrors
The Crossfire is really hard to drive because you can see out of it.

I could keep going but you get the picture. I never said Chysler doesn't make good cars, because they are decent I suppose. I would never buy one. But I just think everything they make is ugly as sin.

I still Neon's are crappy, they are a cheap car meant to go from point A to B and nothing more. If you wanted a little car that was cheap to run, there you go.
 
Later Neon. You will NOT be missed.

However, this new replacement looks, well even dumber. At least the cobalt was an evolution of the Cavalier. This thing looks like junk.
 
Diego440
Anyhow, if there will be a SRT-4 version of this thing in 2007, will it be srt-4? I mean, does this monster of a car really carry a 4-cylinder engine? It looks like it ought to carry a 6 at least.
THIS IS NOT A TRUCK! It's a small car.

To put it in perspective, it is 3 inches shorter than a Chevy HHR or a Mazda 3. The wheelbase is actually 2 inches shorter than that of a Neon. So the old SRT-4 engine should really pull it, especially with AWD.
 
The Caliber is smaller then the neon in length, food for thought.

And Blazin, I don't need your Chevy biased **** in here. That's EXACTLY what the Neon was designed for. It was a economy car made to go from point A to point B.

We own three, 1999 Neon, 2000 Neon, and 2005 Dodge SRT-4. Each have had no problems except the 99 had a blown head gasket, but a well known problem back in the 90s for them but since then was fixed. They are reliable cars for the money you pay for them.
 
How am I Chevy biased? I hate the way every GM truck on the market looks, they can't design them. It's well known on this board that I dislike a lot of GM products. You sir are just to idiotic to see this.

The Neon was a crappy car that needed to die, just like the Caviler was a crappy car that needed to die. Neon's are also one of the worse economy cars on the market, if you want something good you should just buy a Civic, it's that simple.

The Neon has a pretty bad motor in it, its underpowered as all hell. Even the SXT was underpowered. For the record I at one time had a 1995 Plymouth Neon and I hated it. Everyone knows how I feel about the SRT-4 (overrated).

And I'm sorry my opinion differs from yours. I just guess all 14 year olds think they are right, I was the same way.
 
Not to add more to the argument... but yes, actually. The 2000 Neon (with the 2.0 engine, 132hp) is actually a pretty nice, responsive and quick car. We reached about 210 kph on a stretch of road once (roughly 125 mph), with A/C on and had no problems afterwards.

I think it was well designed and a nice economy car, better looking than the Cavalier and the US Escort.
 
I'm sorry but a 2.0L 132hp engine is weak when compared to the competition. You have a Focus with 150hp and the Cobalt with 145hp, that doesn't even get into the Japanese competition or Volkswagen.

Its not false to say the Neon motor is bad when compared to the competition

Not to mention the interior of a Neon looks extremely cheap. The only thing cheapish on the Cobalt in the vents, and on the Focus I actually like the interior.
 
Back