| Year of manufacture | 1997 |
| First year of ownership | 1998 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2006 |
| Engine and transmission | SOHC Automatic |
| Performance marks | 8 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 8 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 8 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
8.0 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 0 miles |
| Most recent distance | 0 miles |
| Previous car | Ford Escort |
Summary:
A good soldier
Faults:
Head gasket 50,00, brakes 70,000, AC 80,000.
General Comments:
I was doubtful this car would be as good as it is.
Approaching 120k and still runs fine.
I will get a Corolla or Civic next, but I would not diss this car.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 25th June, 2006
| Model year | 1997 |
| Year of manufacture | 1997 |
| First year of ownership | 1997 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2006 |
| Engine and transmission | 2.0 Manual |
| Performance marks | 5 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 7 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 7 / 10 |
| Dealer Service marks | 8 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 9 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
7.2 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 7 miles |
| Most recent distance | 157000 miles |
Summary:
For being a throw away car, it has been a good runner in 9 years
Faults:
2 oxygen sensors went out, one at 30,000 and one at 60,000 miles.
Head gasket went out at 150,000 miles.
Speedometer is weird, it works then it don't.
Fuel pickup/sender broke at 125,000.
General Comments:
I have read a few of these reviews, and now it is time I stick up for the little neon.
I will start by saying everything that I read is true (no electrical problems that I know of).
Up until recently, 150,000 miles, nothing has gone wrong on my little car.
I did end up changing the head gasket at 150,000 miles, cost... $1200!
Everyone said it would go out before 60,000 or right after the warranty expired. Ha!
Gas mileage is incredible, I once nailed 43mpg on 93 octane, before you needed to re mortgage your house for gas to go town.
The paint is great, I spotted some cancer last year. Not bad for 8 year old paint.
Not all are bad.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 19th May, 2006
| Model year | 1997 |
| Year of manufacture | 1997 |
| First year of ownership | 2005 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2006 |
| Engine and transmission | 2.0 litre Automatic |
| Performance marks | 2 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 5 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 7 / 10 |
| Dealer Service marks | 2 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 0 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
3.2 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 59000 kilometres |
| Most recent distance | 147000 kilometres |
| Previous car | Chevrolet Cavalier |
Summary:
Buy a Honda
Faults:
A week after I bought this car from the dealership, it began to leak coolant at 60,000 km's. The mechanic said it was the O-ring. Replaced O-ring, problem was still there. Turns out it was the "head gasket", a well known problem with these cars. Got head gasket fixed. at 80,000 km's brakes began to squeak at complete stop. Problem seems to never go away, yet another trait for these cars. At 85,000 km's I began to have electrical issues when I opened the drivers door, dome light fails to come on. Yet another regular neon occurance. Car ran flawlessly up until 135,000km's. Then all hell broke loose. Spark plugs are accumulating oil on the ends and no one seems to know why. Engine light is permantently on, covered with black tape. Car doesn't overheat, but definitely has lost its power. Tires are always out of alignment. Water is always accumulating on the rear floors. All in all, a complete nightmare. Oh, and the paint flakes off like nail polish. And the transmission squeaks and slips. Oh did I mention the speakers don't work. And the headlight casing is as yellow as the sun. I could go on for days, but whats the point?
General Comments:
The worst car ever conceived. Looked like a good deal at the time. Being a student, I wanted something that was good on gas and stylish enough to tour around in. What a mistake. The amount of money I could put into this car could be enough for a down payment on a house, but I'd rather just drive this pos the way it is and hope that it explodes. I have nothing positive to say about this car other than it is roomy enough for a homeless person to live in.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No
Review Date: 2nd May, 2006
You can buy a decent Honda for the same amount as a Dodge Neon, the values are way different. As soon as you leave the lot with any Chrysler product, the value crashes through the floor and the banks are laughing like mad.
However such as the new Magnum and Charger may change things at least for certain cars. The Neon however is known to be trash, leaking head gaskets poor quality materials so the value on those are pretty low.. one exception might be the turbo model offered in the last few years. I think it produces like 230hp, and it most likely will hold its value because of the performance offered.
The Magnum and the Charger will still drop in value as well.
Even the best selling Mustang is being severely discounted around here, something that wouldn't happen if a vehicle held its value.
"Engine light is permantently on, covered with black tape."
That's one interesting approach to vehicle maintenance.
To the poster above: I think the turbocharged SRT-4 engine is designed and built by Mitsubishi.
The Mustang loses value through rising gas price and sheer numbers sold. Charger and 300 seem to hold price very well which is sort of surprising. But this being a early Neon it will have it's shares of problems. In 2001 or 2003 they were redesigned and were much much better.
The concept of "vehicle value" was invented by car salesmen and finance officers to make stupid people think they were being smart for writing a $500 check every month. A vehicle has value as long as it moves under its own power and gets you where you need to go. If you are making a car payment to achieve that objective, then that is a concept known as "over-valued."