Dodge Caliber

I believe I saw one for the first time yesterday driving past me in a
parking lot. It looked a lot bigger than I was expecting. It was gone
before I could take a second look. It clearly had a Dodge grill and I just
looked at the dodge web site to see if they were making a similar looking
but bigger vehicle but found nothing. Either it was a Caliber or someone is
driving a new design around here.

 

They have visual tricks that make them look husky, for example high side
window lines. But they're not tiny. They weigh over 3000 pounds. Their
handling and fuel economy reflect that, unfortunately.

I was interested in them when they first came out, but now I think I'll keep
my Focus a while longer.

 

Yikes, you're right! Taking a look at the Dodge website, the Caliber's
estimate fuel economy is 23MPG city/26MPG highway! And this is supposed
to e the successor to the Neon? Mu '05 Neon's fuel economy is 25/32, by
comparison.

And here I was, wishing I had waited a year; now I'm glad I didn't. I
was slightly disappointed by the Caliber's interior and exterior
appearance, but the mileage and handling issues have really turned me
off to it.

 

Yes, I was planning to buy a Neon for a commuter car, but then found
that they were being discontinued. I bought a 2006 Sonata instead and
am getting 31 MPG with both more performance and more room and comfort
than the Caliber. I think Chrysler really missed the boat on this one.
What does it take for them to see what Honda and Toyota have learned
with the Civic/Corolla and the Accord/Camary. Quality
small/intermediate cars will sell by the truckload. I'm betting that
Calibers won't, but time will tell.


Matt

 

That's barely better then the 300C which is rated at 25 highway (I've
gotten 24 in my 300C AWD but that was on a very long highway trip). How is
it possible that a little runt of a car like the Caliber can only get 26
highway. The 300C has an excuse, it's a massively powerful two ton car,
whats' the Caliber's excuse?. My old 94 Concorde got 29MPG on the highway,
that's real MPGs not EPA, so what has Chrysler forgotten in the last 10
years?

 

I'm surprised you get that kind of mileage with the C. Some of the people
I've spoken to have only managed to get 19 on the highway and at 60MPH no
less.

Ken

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

I mostly get 19 on the highway. On a couple of occasions I've done better.
On some 200 mile drives I've gotten 22. My record is 24 when I
drove from Massachusetts to Ontario, but that was 7 hours of straight
highway driving. Vermont has mountains so it wasn't the absolutely best
possible scenario but it's close. I also drove with a light foot although
I did 75MPH most of the way. The key is to not light the afterburners.
When you put your foot down on a C you can watch the gas gauge drop. When
I first got it the temptation to floor it was irresistible, you can go
from 60 to 100 in the time it takes to pass a semi, but if you do that
you'll end up getting 14MPG. If you keep it at a steady speed it drops
back to 4 cylinders and the MPG isn't horrible. It's never great mileage,
as I said earlier my old Concorde got 29 on the highway and when it was
new I sometimes managed to get over 30. On the other hand the Concorde
couldn't do 0-60 in 5.5 seconds.

 

I as expecting Mopar to come up with a Civic/Corolla type vehicle but
unfortunately it didn't happen I had to decide between a Caliber and
another PT Cruiser a few weeks ago. I really wanted to like the Caliber but
is was very slow off the line even and the engine was noisy compared to the
PT. I was really disappointed. I know the gas mileage isn't as great on a
PT but IMHO the PT is a much quieter refined car than the Caliber right now,
plus it offers more for the money if you compare base models. Chrysler did
a great job with quieting the PT and refining the interior for 06. I think
they really goofed on the Caliber.

 

Maybe Chrysler should start buying small engines from Honda like GM.

 

Too right. i mean, my 97 t+c's rated 24 highway, and at one time
(when the wife was driving it for bsuiness, doing a route with 400lb
of merchendise int he back 0it was averaging (total average) of
24.4mpg.

i did get slightly over 30mpg on a trip in my 87 caravan (3l v6)
gooing from Atlanta to Salisbury, NC to pick up 3/4 ton of lexan (in
8ft sheets - had them running diagonally, propped over our heads with
sticks against the roof and windscreen) and back again in a day. 87's
aren't exactly the most aerodynamic. Did another run in it from
Griffin, ga to Talahassee down US19 to take a rfiend to pick up a car,
and back. That time we had the AC on but it was stil upper 20's mpg.

Frankly, caliber's an ugly vehicle. hideous even

 

Yikes, you're right! Taking a look at the Dodge website, the Caliber's

That is the estimated mileage for the R/T version. The 2.0 is rated @
26/30 and the 1.8 is rated @ 28/32
http://www.dodge.com/en/performance/#mpg_caliber

Steve B.

 

That's still acceptable for a car that can bring many smiles if you can
resist "flooring-it". I really like the car and will probably purchase one
next year.

I hope they use that new white I saw at the NY Car Show. It was an extended
300C and they person there told me the color was called tri-white or
something along those line. It looked really nice under those lights.

Still waiting and hoping for the Pacifica to get a Hemi. If DC can put one
in an AWD 300C, I don't know why they can't put one in the Pacifica or it
because they have other reasons.

Finally, why don't they offer chrome wheels on the AWD 300C?

Ken

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

Or test them a little longer. Perhaps they're rushing them out.

The local dealer had three here and they were gone in a week.

These cars look nice and I like the options. I think they would make great
commuter cars.

BTW, I sold the 300M :-( It was just a too small for me for head room.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

My in-laws are loving the 300M we gave them. We had a bit of paint done on
it and had it detailed before shipping it to them. Their neighbors think
the 99 is a new car.

 

Notwithstanding the barely adequate engine in the Pacifica, it is getting
good press lately. If I was considering one, I would certainly test drive
the cheap one with the cheaper engine and without the 3rd row seat. Without
the extra valves, you might get improved low end throttle when you need it
and you get rid of a little weight without the 3rd row.

 

I have a '95 Concord and the Caliber plus Ford Focus SW are on my short
list, plus a few other cars. The Concord has lots of life yet so I can
wait for the Caliber to mature and others to appear. The recent high
fuel prices which seem to be sticking will change car designs over the
next several years.
My needs have moved to an urban car of the station wagon type. Easy
loading of golf clubs and pull carts are my priority.
For the highway my wife's Sebring does the job very well.

I've only sat in the base Caliper and was impressed by the slightly
higher seat and head room. The interior finish could be better.

Not surprising the highway mileage isn't that great as the Caliber
doesn't look that stream lined. The truck like front certainly gives it
a larger look, quite different from it's cousin the Mercedes B-200.
http://www.mercedes-benz.ca/index.cfm?id=4958

The high front does improve parking ease, low hoods make the front
difficult to see.
The Caliber must be selling OL as the few on my local dealers lot are
gone and no more are sitting around. Lots of 300s sitting on this and
other dealers lots though. Vancouver, BC just isn't the place for the
300. A few days ago I saw a used loaded 2006 300C in a local Chrysler
dealers ad for only C$26,000; my what a depreciation hit.
A few weeks ago in southern UK I saw a black 300. Over there it looks
even more of a monster and didn't impress my UK friends.

I just had a rental Focus wagon in the UK for 3 weeks. Excellent
interior space and excellent fuel mileage with the 1.6L engine stick
shift, but very noisy. In fact too noisy to enjoy the radio of speak to
others. There was some transmission noise, but front and rear tire
(tyre there- < ) noise increased significantly with speed. The hood
line is a bit too low for easy parking. Previously in the UK I've twice
rented the Focus hatch back and didn't notice and excessive noise.
How quiet my 11 yr old Concord was on my return.
I plan to try a NA Focus with the 2.0L auto.

 

....can't really blame all the negatives on Chrysler Engineering. It's a
"world car", with a "global" (read: Hyundai) engine. The platform is, or
will be, sold as a Hyundai, Mitsu, Jeep, etc. (and someone said the Benz
B200...dunno ???)

Still, this isn't really an excuse, just a "who not to blame" statement. But
take the portly, tipsy Caliber out for a drive on a twisty road, then any
decent Gen-I Neon. Night and day.

The Neons were "real" Mopars....i.e, lousy fit and finish, strange noises,
leaks, etc. But, maximum performance for minimum bucks that nobody else
could touch. Plus, they didn't have even 2% of Jap or Korean stuff in 'em.

Sniff, sniff....

Rick

 

Glad to hear they're enjoying the car. I see some every now and then. It was
nice to have a car that was unique, somewhat.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

Might work for me. Looking forward to seeing the new Chrysler Aspen.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna

 

The "new" Aspen is a reskinned Durango.