22nd Sep 2014, 22:23

I don't think your Chrysler history facts are quite accurate. The K car wasn't horrible at all. Nor is Chrysler. You may have a bad Dodge Dart, but that doesn't mean they are all bad. In fact I'm quite impressed with many of the vehicles the Chrysler-Fiat union has developed. I only wish they hadn't discontinued the 200 Convertible when they redesigned the 200.

I saw a 200 AWD sitting in the showroom of my nearby Chrylser Jeep Dodge Ram dealership when I stopped by for an inspection sticker, & was very impressed with it, but I think they are making a mistake in no longer offering a convertible. All of the Sebring/200 Convertible owners/enthusiasts will have a tough time when it comes time to buy another mid-size convertible, as most convertibles just don't have the room the Chryslers do. They sold fairly well too, as about one in twenty 200's sold were convertibles, and just look at all of the older Sebring Convertibles still on the road.

23rd Sep 2014, 13:15

Actually, far from being a "no-name" brand, Kumho is a quite well-known Korean tire manufacturer, with many positive product reviews on tirerack.com and elsewhere.

What I can't figure out is how someone with such an obviously low opinion of Chrysler products ever even set foot in a JCD dealer showroom, let alone actually buying one. Then again, their previous car was a FIAT...

23rd Sep 2014, 21:45

For the record, the K-Car was indeed rubbish, but it did sell quite well nonetheless, and their 4 cylinders were pretty sturdy units.

IMO the reason that Dodge revived the "Dart" name is that the original Dodge Dart was one of the only compacts that Chrysler got right in terms of quality; once the Aspen hit they spiraled downward with maybe a few decent "flukes" in the process.

The new Dart is essentially a bigger Alfa Romeo powered by a Hyundai-designed 2.0L. So there's the reason why your engine kicked the can early.

Most modern infotainment systems have a habit of crashing/rebooting; they're a more recent thing in modern cars, so it won't be for a year or so until car companies have more solid systems.

24th Sep 2014, 17:43

It would be great if fans of the brand didn't constantly jump to the defense of their brand every time one of their cars receives a fair review.

As I said earlier, as the author of this review, I was willing to give Chrysler a chance.

They promised great styling, reliability, durability, advanced engineering, and outstanding quality.

They delivered a turd with great styling, horrendous reliability and build quality, riding on cheaply-made no-name tires (please don't try to tell me that Kumho is a "major brand.")

My prior opinion of Chrysler and willingness to try another Chrysler product (the FIAT I had prior was built by Chrysler as well) aren't relevant to the review.

The 2013 Dart is GARBAGE, and that's obvious from the reviews by unfortunate owners across the web. It's also clear that if you need service for serious problems like catastrophic engine failures at 5,000 miles, you're not going to get it.

My dealer has given up on giving me regular updates on the progress of the car, when the engine will be replaced, etc. He's finally just said "we've escalated to Chrysler, when we hear something, we'll call you".

Any Chrysler fan who wants to buy my awesome Dart should private-message me. I'll sell it to him for Blue Book value, so he can enjoy the outstanding engineering that went into this fine automobile.

25th Sep 2014, 15:11

Soooo....you have expressed your low opinion of Chrysler products as evidenced by your comments on the K-car and the Neon, but you still have not explained why you bought one. Did you not form that opinion until AFTER you bought the Dart? Or did you think that FIAT's ownership of Chrysler would bring about some miraculous improvement in product quality, so you were "willing to give them a chance"?

26th Sep 2014, 16:27

Actually your FIAT was built by FIAT, who now controls Chrysler Corp.

Your venom towards Chrysler comes through loud & clear when you describe one of their products with words such as 'turd', so it might be a natural reaction to question the objectivity of such a review.

28th Sep 2014, 03:29

You're dealing with a (somewhat modified) Alfa Romeo platform, courtesy of parent company Fiat.

Having said that, I'm surprised there aren't more reviews like yours. Fiat was not known for quality. We know 3 people who have this car, and other than the tire problems you mention, they have done well with, and are happy with the car.

An interesting aside about the tire problems - the local MegaDealer offers a tire/wheel warranty package - 2 of the 3 people we know have used it - potholes are no friend of cars who have sidewalls less than 3 inches high ;)

Good luck - and keep us posted :)

29th Sep 2014, 17:40

Great review, well :-) and I like the little history lesson at the gate to bring folks up-to-speed. My lil sis is driving age now & still wouldn't know what a 'K-car' is.

30th Sep 2014, 21:09

With all due respect, I would take the 'history lesson' with a grain of salt, as IMO the reviewer let his disdain for his Dart color his views regarding Chrysler's history. In fact the K Car was a very good car, and the platform was used on some very reliable and successful models.

30th Sep 2014, 22:19

Yeah, well you could say the same thing about ANY car that was last built 25 years ago.

3rd Oct 2014, 18:13

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

9th Oct 2014, 01:17

As the original author of this review, I figured an update would be useful.

My car has now been sitting at the dealership for more than 40 days. I just received an e-mail from Chrysler saying they have no idea when a replacement engine will be available for my car, but they'll continue to "check in" on a weekly basis.

Keep in mind that this is "warranty service." Apparently, Chrysler is such a mess that they cannot find and provide a crate engine to the dealership to repair my car. And the dealership is such a mess that they cannot get it back on the road after 40 days.

"Venom towards Chrysler?" Of course. And it's completely justified. This car has been a nightmare, the customer service has been absolutely dreadful, and warranty service on my new car has been nonexistent. It's been a month-and-a-half in the shop and it's no closer to being repaired than it was the day the engine went "kaboom" at 5,000 miles.

Chrysler fans keep making excuses, but this situation is inexcusable.

9th Oct 2014, 01:27

PS -- what words am I "supposed" to use for this car, if not "turd?"

Am I supposed to say "it's a great car, except for the total engine failure at 5,000 miles?"

Or should I say "the service was outstanding, except for the fact that 40+ days later the vehicle remains unrepaired?"

Perhaps I should say "I'm grateful for the opportunity to own this car, as I've lost weight due to all the walking I've been forced to do while it rusts away at the dealership waiting to be repaired sometime in the next year, hopefully?"

What should I say? How should I feel? What should I think? Please, Chrysler fans, enlighten me (preferably after paying me the Kelly Blue Book value for this fine automobile that you insist is a masterpiece that I should not disparage).