• fb_100000105026626 avatar Dan Posted: 2/20/2013 8:17am PST

    Why isn't it selling? Because it is 100% ill-conceived. It is a nothing car and and INSULT to the Dart name. This Dart should have been re-introduced as the "5th Generation" just as the as the 4th generation (67-76) was introduced: The Poor Man's Muscle Car. The 2013 Dart should have a 375 horse 340 CI motor and run the 1/4 in less than 14 seconds. Offer some very cool exterior colors. Leave the interior and options sparse. Couple it with a tough ad campaign that harkens back to the last 60's/early 70s Dart. They will not be able to make them fast enough.

    Idiots from Chrysler. You don't even know what the people want!

  • fb_851130444 avatar Dan Posted: 2/21/2013 7:49am PST

    Can't fault Chrysler for being smart enough to not make a car that would cannabalize sales from the Challenger... Right now fuel efficiency is a little more important than high power (as much as it pains me to say it).

  • fb_82100996 avatar Richard Posted: 1/23/2013 6:28am PST

    The name is not the problem. The Dart is just OK. Nothing horrible. Nothing spectacular. A middle-of-the-field player. Honda learned that a luke-warm Civic is not good enough today.

  • Doug S avatar Doug S Posted: 3/3/2013 4:37am PST

    Not so charlie. The problem with slow sales in price. I went to look at the new Dart along with checking out the Elantra Optima and Forte. A entry level Optima pretty well done with air cruise power all was $22k out the door compared ot the well equiped Dart at a whopping $24k The fully appointed Elantra leather sunroof etc compared with the same equiped Dart came out to a $4k difference. YEs the Dart was $4k more. ON top of all the Dodge dealers were jerks compared to the KIA and Hyundai sales people. Bottom line the DART is overpriced by thousands.

  • fb_100004222596600 avatar Edward Posted: 5/22/2013 9:28am PDT

    Back in 1991 I decided to b buy a new full size pickup truck. I went to each of the Big 3 and told them to give me their best offer and that I would not be back to negotiate the price since I would buy the best offer that day. I took a copy of the window sticker to give each a fair shot concerning the options on each truck. Even back then Chrysler was $4,000 higher than any of the other two.

  • R1954 avatar R1954 Posted: 1/22/2013 11:11am PST

    It's not the name "Dart". It is that the car does nothing outstanding in a market that is full of good cars. You don't need to be marketing genius to know the problem.

  • PastureMuffins avatar PastureMuffins Posted: 7/22/2013 2:03pm PDT

    Anyone who would buy a car because of the name is an idiot and deserves what they got. All 3 car makers built a lot of crap in the 60's and 70's and this name only services to remind them of that. With so many choices out there of cars that are reliable, no wonder they are having a time pushing this muffin.

  • bigmone75 avatar bigmone75 Posted: 1/23/2013 6:41am PST

    Waiting for SRT to do their thing

  • fb_1170042516 avatar fb_1170042516 Posted: 1/23/2013 12:11pm PST

    The problem is, it's ok. Styling is ok, performance is ok, price is ok. There are too many cars in this class that have one thing better than ok. The advertising touts it as more than it is, and when you get to actually see one it is dissapointing. No one went back to the drawing board on this car.
    There are many of us who have fond memories of a Dart, but it's not enough to even bring me to the dealer to look at one.

  • Annatar avatar Annatar Posted: 1/22/2013 12:32pm PST

    The Dart is not selling because it is a cheap, ugly version of the Alfa Romeo Giulietta.

    Had FIAT brought over the JTD diesel Giulietta, I contend that the car would have been a smash hit.

    Just compare the interiors of the Dart versus the Giulietta, and my point should be pretty clear.

  • ModernMode avatar ModernMode Posted: 1/22/2013 2:24pm PST

    Most people are not going to buy a diesel when the fuel is at least 50 cents per gallon more expensive than regular gasoline. That's on top of some diesels requiring urea to be added to reduce pollution.

  • Annatar avatar Annatar Posted: 1/23/2013 8:54am PST

    Then "most people" should do a little bit of envelope calculation, whereby it will easily become obvious that even though diesel is the most expensive fuel, the clean diesel engine is such a fuel mizer than one actually comes out ahead in terms of fuel cost savings, by anywhere from 5% to 30%.

    "Most people" would also do well to bear in mind that achieving 600,000 miles before an engine rebuild is "business as usual" for a diesel engine, which does not start to break in until 70,000 - 80,000 miles, increasing in fuel efficiency as it does so.

    Also, "most people" should not forget that the clean diesel option offers loads of torque, which translates into performance in the form of acceleration.

  • fb_100003069108896 avatar John Posted: 3/27/2013 1:52pm PDT

    I think your overestimating the intelligence of this market. A good portion of them can barely calculate break-even points let along cost savings over a period of time.

    I completely agree with your points about diesel engines. The problem though is average US market buyer doesn't need a 600k motor, average ownership is 71.4 months just shy of 6 years. 6 years of 20k/year is well within the capacity of a combustion engine.

    Which brings you to up front costs. Diesels in the BMW's as an example are 5-6k more than their gasoline counterparts. Hard to recoup your costs over a 6 year period unless you're doing 40-50k/year in mileage.

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 6:55pm PDT

    Women do NOT want the odor of diesel fuel on their hands all day after going to the pumping station.

  • PastureMuffins avatar PastureMuffins Posted: 7/22/2013 2:05pm PDT

    So they like gas smell better? Have them move to Oregon, where they still pump the gas for you.

  • dialate avatar dialate Posted: 2/20/2013 8:32am PST

    Same reason the Mercury Marauder was a flop...they brought back a cool brand name, and delivered a dorky-looking Crown Vic at a sporty trim level. Likewise the Dart that looks like a Neon with a bit more black plastic and chrome to make it look more like a mid-range Japanese sedan...

    They did a good job at getting the word out. But if you're introducing a new brand, you need to deliver something cool (or cheap), or no one is gonna risk the reliability issues that come with a new model of car.

  • Tybeedawg avatar Tybeedawg Posted: 1/22/2013 12:40pm PST

    1. down on power at the top end of the offering. 2. the name "Dart" doesn't help.

  • fb_100005087826587 avatar fb_100005087826587 Posted: 1/22/2013 2:11pm PST

    mr. bigland should not talk so much about other people failing, he himself failed miserably with the launch of the dodge dart.
    what a useless gearbox that car has, no wonder it does not sell.
    and how about the bigland launch of the fiat 500 without any dealer network, of course it did not sell.
    marchionne should appoint a man who knows his stuff.
    can you imagine which levers bigland is going to pull to launch the alfa romeo 4c.
    we are on our way for another bigland flop.

  • texmotodad avatar texmotodad Posted: 1/22/2013 4:24pm PST

    The car is really presented as an "economical" basic car. Even don't mind the name Dart. (Fond memories of my fathers good 'ol slant 6) Read some nice things about it. When it came out in Houston we went to look at it and both of the dealers we visited had so many options on it.....why bother. Why make it what is isn't. We bought a Cruze.

  • fb_711380461 avatar Lee Posted: 1/22/2013 6:54pm PST

    Needs more HP. End of story.

  • jestyler avatar jestyler Posted: 1/23/2013 7:21am PST

    This car is on a Fiat platform, growing up in 70's and 80's Fiats were nothing but crap and still have that stigma with me. Chrysler isn't much above that stigma either. Why would I buy this car when there are already high quality competitors out there like honda civic, toyota corolla. Fiat and chrysler need to correct their image as putting out junk and this one car (the dart) certainly won't change that stigma. Show me cars that hold together, are ultra reliable and can go 200,000 miles in a blink and I will consider them at that point

  • fb_3614143 avatar Sam Posted: 3/27/2013 1:05pm PDT

    The brain washed baby boomer has spoken. In what way are the Corolla and Civic high quality? The fact that the Corolla lacks anything remotely class competitive and has been on the market for 7 years? Or is it the fact that the Civic did so poorly on a Consumer Reports comparison that Honda was forced to execute an emergency refresh on that car? Blind faith like that just breeds complacency which is what Honda and Toyota have been churning out for years now.

  • fb_610074342 avatar Kenneth Posted: 6/18/2013 8:40pm PDT

    Hey Sam sorry to burst your bubble, Civics and Corollas average between 310,000-350,000 sales per year. The Hyundai
    Elantra and the Kia Forte are climbing in sales

  • fb_1290932946 avatar Billy Posted: 7/19/2013 10:10am PDT

    If you can get past the blandness of Toyotas and Hondas you have a car that will go 200k easy.

  • PastureMuffins avatar PastureMuffins Posted: 7/22/2013 2:06pm PDT

    I'd rather pay for a Honda or Toyota than get a free Dart. Seriously.

  • techmotor avatar techmotor Posted: 9/6/2013 5:23am PDT

    Hi Thomas

    Probably you know Old Times FIAT, they changed a lot on quality issues and Durability,Ford is a peace of sheet too than...Plataform is Alfa Romeo.

    For example, American cars DO NOT resist South America Hot weather and "off road" driveline, many problems with Durability!!!

    So may I consider American Cars Garbage?

    I think this is more like, "Pissed of why an American incon do not have competence and an Italian bought it"!

    For me the principal problem on Dart sails is Automatized Dual Clutch transmission, more efficient but....

    American people Do prefer normal Automatic type, in real, it has enormous difference.

    For USA I would like to see 1.4 Turbo+8 gear "REAL" automatic!

    Leave Dual Clucht for Sportier version.:)

  • fb_1805887840 avatar Frank Posted: 1/23/2013 5:39pm PST

    Drove one. Light years ahead of the old Neons of the day. Quiet, roomy interior, nice materials inside, and overall tight feeling and well connected car. I like it, but will try to hold out a year or two to see if SRT does their thing. If not, a GT may be in my garage in the not too distant future.

  • fb_1567092218 avatar Bruce Posted: 1/24/2013 7:03pm PST

    I think it is an OK car but it needs to have the horsepower necessary to compete in this market. It is way under powered.

  • fb_1520407223 avatar Guy Posted: 4/15/2013 12:40pm PDT

    That is because it's way over weight for it segment !

  • fb_110001131 avatar Caleb Posted: 3/3/2013 10:59pm PST

    It seems Dodge has done what it does best, and be confused about who they're marketing the car to. It's built like your standard safe family sedan, boring and mundain. Front wheel drive, heavy, sort of numb handling. Kind of like an Altima. But they've also been aiming at the driver's market as well, which will just never happen, and as a result, they've alienated the drivers and the family markets. Good job.

  • fb_1121490272 avatar fb_1121490272 Posted: 3/10/2013 1:58pm PDT

    It doesn't look a bit like the Dart, which could easily be made into a hotrod. Since the name is just that, a name, it's worthless to me. The Challenger at least evokes memories of the original car.

  • fb_7032897 avatar Jeremy Posted: 3/15/2013 8:29am PDT

    I think some people have a problem with the name. There is also a large part of the population that equates automatic transmissions with "Luxury". In other words, they are too lazy or too stupid to drive one. Of course, I am not talking about those who are physically disabled and cannot operate a manual.

  • fb_7032897 avatar Jeremy Posted: 3/15/2013 8:27am PDT

    Too stupid / lazy to drive a manual transmission...to clarify.

  • fb_1679005287 avatar Brad Posted: 3/26/2013 12:02pm PDT

    Talk all you want about issues and the reason more people aren't buying the car is becuase they don't like how it looks. Sorry, but if the car was cool looking, more people would be interested. I personally don't like the back of the car. It's ugly to me. I also walked around different versions of it at my local dealership and some versions are ugly all the way around. The car has some nice tech features but external looks are what you see every day it's parked in your garage...

  • ToppCat avatar ToppCat Posted: 4/3/2013 8:54pm PDT

    Test Drove Turbo and Non Turbo! OMG it is slow! with 4 people it is very very slow! otherwise the Rally looks, handles and ride well! once again its very slow!

  • vitsing avatar vitsing Posted: 4/19/2013 1:27am PDT

    Like the Volt you can not sell something the consumer does not want. Duh - pull the plug.

  • fb_1248923625 avatar fb_1248923625 Posted: 4/21/2013 5:50pm PDT

    I cant speak for everyone else, but the thing that has stopped my interest was simply that its a 4 door. I like it but it should be a coupe. The same has kept me from the charger. Sporty cars need to be two door.

  • cwesleyg avatar cwesleyg Posted: 4/23/2013 10:05am PDT

    Agree 100%. 4 doors are not cool.

  • ratch avatar ratch Posted: 6/18/2013 6:40am PDT

    AMEN! You can and should shout that from the ROOFTOPS .... I certainly do

  • fb_1067927339 avatar Bill Posted: 6/2/2013 3:53am PDT

    the ones old enough to remember the Dart of the late 60 early 70's remember the slant 6 or better yet slapping a hi-performance engine under the hood. The design was what is inscribed in people
    s minds when the word Dart is mentioned. To come out now with a dart and looking like a Japanese car is a losing situation for Dodge. The people who did the design should be fired and made to walk the walk of shame down every city Main St. Come back with a design that looks of old and give engine choices better then a Turtle and you'll make sales.

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 6:50pm PDT

    Redesign the body to look like the 1971 then drop in a 440 cid w/6-pack. It'll sell.

  • fb_100003409359797 avatar Amanda Posted: 6/24/2013 10:45am PDT

    Why isn't the Dart selling? How about the crappy name and people remembering what a crummy car the Dart was in the past. It'd be like Ford bringing back the Mercury Comet. Chrysler quality is still subpar compared to Japanese competitors and their vehicles continue to be boxy and ugly. The re-designed Cherokee looks about as silly as one could make a toy car and not too many guys who off-road occasionally are going to want to be seen in one of those.

  • fb_1290071620 avatar Bruce-Debbie Posted: 6/24/2013 4:35pm PDT

    Fiat/Chrysler enough said. Expect the car to fall apart in a few months.

  • fb_1131811354 avatar Ray Posted: 1/22/2013 7:51pm PST

    'Dart' sounds too much like 'fart.' Seriously though, I checked out the Turbo Dart and I felt it to be a decent car. However, once I added added on a few nice options it would cost way more than any other car in its class. Plus "Fix It Again Tony" kept resonating in my head. Fiat has its work cut out for them. I wish them well.

  • fb_636251774 avatar David Posted: 1/23/2013 11:03am PST

    It's because Americans have been corrupted by the relentless propaganda about superior Japanese quality and reliability - however true that might once have been, it isn't now.

  • fb_1290932946 avatar Billy Posted: 7/19/2013 10:15am PDT

    Personal experience is not propaganda. The best cars I have ever owned are Toyotas.

  • PastureMuffins avatar PastureMuffins Posted: 7/22/2013 2:13pm PDT

    Ohhh really? My Toyota Tundra has 166k miles on it, the only service expense was $75 for an oxygen sensor that went at 145k. Still has original brakes. Other than $75 for the sensor, it has never seen the inside of a service shop for anything.

    OK....My American built Dodge Ram 2500 truck...let's see, cracked cheap Chinese plastic dashboards...$1,000.00, premature failure of the front wheel bearings....$375.00 PER SIDE, sending unit it fuel tank....$900.00, failed AC compressor...$625.00...the list goes on and on. I think I'll stick with Toyota and their propaganda. Also owned 7 Honda's and a Mitsubishi 3000GT, none of which ever saw a service shop for anything. The proof is in ownership, not marketing. I'll take being corrupted.

  • fb_100000447486182 avatar fb_100000447486182 Posted: 3/30/2013 1:39pm PDT

    It is just crap. Another version of a Yugo. Cheap is cheap. Plain and simple.

  • fb_1520407223 avatar Guy Posted: 4/15/2013 12:39pm PDT

    Sergio stated at launch time the Dart had to be a winner. However by sharing a platform that is to large and thus over weight it's killing the mpg/figures & performance. At a recent car cruise I was surprised at the length of this car. The same issue haunts the porkey Dodge Challenger. Sometimes you just gotta bite the bullet on cost to get a winner ?

  • fb_100000321034945 avatar Shawn Posted: 4/17/2013 9:39am PDT

    The name IS an issue, I mean who has fond memories of the Dodge Dart (if you're old enough to remember it)? Another issue might be that some of us have been underwhelmed with more recent Chrysler small car efforts. I was a Neon owner, it was a poorly designed/built car as other owners can (and do) attest. Many issues, some never resolved. I realize this is a different company now and a totally different car---but those kinds of bad memories linger. Personally, I would steer away from ANY small Chrysler without seeing it build up years of documented good reliability. But that's just me.

  • ratch avatar ratch Posted: 6/18/2013 6:38am PDT

    Agreed, 100%. I hated the Dart in the 70's, and this one similarly has no flair, no OOMPH. I owned a Sebring a few years ago, the 6 cyl, and was sorely disappointed. My other car was a 9 year old chevy lumina z-34, which had more engine, more power, a better turning radius, better styling inside and out, AND got much better gas mileaage. Needless to say, I habitually drove the old chevy. I havve steered away from any small chrysler ever since, and will continue to do so.

  • Crazylooie avatar Crazylooie Posted: 4/17/2013 10:11am PDT

    There are only 2 things wrong with this article, the style and the content.

  • fb_100000479788207 avatar Don Alphonse Posted: 4/19/2013 8:17am PDT

    It's very simple really. The brandname heritage i.e. Dodge Dart harkens back to a cheap POS economy car which was never a "cool" car. Think Valiant,Gremlin,Pacer etc. The successful cars were always the "cool"restagings of Mustang,Camaro,Challenger,Charger etc. Use of the "DART" name was a error from the get-go. I am sure much better success would have been had if they had utilized the "Baracuda", "Hemi-Cuda", or "Road-Runner" MOPAR heritage instead. Blame it on the lack of understanding of the American market by current Italian owner Fiat. They should have paid Lee Iacocca a consult fee..or perhaps me!!!!

  • Pete0097 avatar Pete0097 Posted: 4/22/2013 12:38am PDT

    I drove a 66 Dart GT, 273 V8, 4 speed and it was a great car. Updated it to disc brakes, McPherson strut front suspension, 360 V8,Rack and pinion steering,and high back bucket seats. It was a way better car. The problem is that it still was almost a barn on wheels from an aero point of view. All of the darts were. The new Dart is a 4 door mini-sedan and it just doesn't have a stand out design, contrary to their adds. There is no leg room in the back so that cuts out people with legs so why have it. It still looks like a Neon (great car, I had one) but it really is not a family sedan and should not be treated as such. The Avenger is more of the family sedan and is very close to the old Dart in size. That should have been named Dart. But remember, the Darts were considered "compact" cars at the time.

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 7:06pm PDT

    To be fair, all muscle cars of the 1960's lacked aerodynamics. They were square, powerful, and fast on a straight line. Poor cornering was commonplace. The pony cars were more maneuverable.

  • fb_100001724001837 avatar Rex Posted: 4/22/2013 7:42am PDT

    Because it is overpriced out the gate on an unproven model that some “Marketing GENIUS” named after one of the rustiest, smokiest, leakiest, Klunkiest, worst handling, worst performing cars of all time.
    The slant six versions did run until the bodies disintegrated. You have to give them that respect.

  • cwesleyg avatar cwesleyg Posted: 4/23/2013 10:04am PDT

    The Dart is one the most successful cars Chrysler ever had anything to do with... it had a huge history of success. Furthermore the engine choices were all solid... the slant 6 was great as you mentioned... the 318 and 340 versions were more fun to drive and very solid mechanically. They did't rust any worse than their GM and FOMOCO contemporaries.

  • TonyAnz avatar TonyAnz Posted: 4/22/2013 8:35am PDT

    It's fugly. Plain and simple.

  • jmopar1 avatar jmopar1 Posted: 4/24/2013 9:13am PDT

    standard transmission????are you serious????corvett and mustang both have automatics available----and the car is too small period

  • RufusTBeauregard avatar RufusTBeauregard Posted: 7/8/2013 4:35pm PDT

    My MINI is a hoot to drive with a stick. Compared to my automatic 328, I prefer the MINI on track day. If the stick version of the Dart is a turd, imagine how slow and boring the automatic version must be.

  • patpur avatar patpur Posted: 4/24/2013 9:29am PDT

    Make it a 2 door and put a hemi in it and it will sell. Otherwise it's the same old story in different skin.
    Chrysler probably could have milked the PT a few more years if they offered a performance 6 and/or a panel version. Never happened and people lost interest. Sorry the advertising on this vehicle is terrible as well.

  • trapperpg avatar trapperpg Posted: 4/25/2013 1:51pm PDT

    Fix It Again Tony. Fiat does not have the best record in the states when it come to reliability, nor does Chrysler. I may be in a group of one, but I'm not willing to risk my $ to let them try and prove me wrong.

  • fb_100000430005039 avatar Anthony Posted: 5/21/2013 10:36am PDT

    The Dodge Dart looks great. If it had been mostly automatic transmissions, it would've done better sales. The product is about as good as it could be. The manual transmission will make it quicker than it's competition; hints Dart. It is a good design in my opinion. It will take another year for people to catch on.....

  • fb_100002840140340 avatar Larry N Patrick Posted: 6/18/2013 3:17pm PDT

    fine.....simple answer....overpriced piece of crap

  • Geezer1948 avatar Geezer1948 Posted: 6/22/2013 10:58pm PDT

    Did they really think they were fooling anybody with those commercials showing Darts drifting & sliding? Every car I have ever owned could do that...on loose dirt! Was that supposed to show us how "sporty" they were? I sat there slack-jawed waiting to see if they would truly show some performance footage...but I waited in vain. Also, some of us old dudes remember the early 60's darts with no more than a slant-six and a 3-on-the-tree that performed with lots of guts & go...and who can forget the super stock Darts with big cubes and light bodies? Maybe they should have tried a new name, rather than trying to resurrect a legend.

  • MoparJim avatar MoparJim Posted: 7/1/2013 4:02pm PDT

    My biggest gripe is Mopar Engineers with thier stupidity, they keep producing 4 door cars...I don't recall ever seeing a 4 door Dodge Charger ever in the muscle car era, and all the Dart's that were sporty were 2 doors. trying to picture a 4dr GTS with a 4spd and a 383, just not happening. This "new" Dart should have been produced in a 2 door version only.

  • fb_1304134328 avatar Johnathan Posted: 3/28/2013 11:03am PDT

    It looks like a Hyundai if you ask me. Can't re-use a name from a popular car back in the day to sell a car that externally looks almost 100% like a cheap Korean car.

  • fb_100000447486182 avatar fb_100000447486182 Posted: 3/30/2013 1:39pm PDT

    Agreed. We all laugh at losers who drive cars made in Korea.

  • Blux avatar Blux Posted: 4/26/2013 6:31am PDT

    A good 20-30% of any domestic vehicle, is manufactured in another country. Including Korea, China, Japan, Mexico and Canada.

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 7:01pm PDT

    The Koreans warrantee their cars better than Detroit and the UAW. Chevy still can't figure where to put a cup holder or that people like the gas filler on the driver's side.

  • 8o88y avatar 8o88y Posted: 7/5/2013 7:49pm PDT

    My most recent Subaru and Nissan both had passenger side gas fillers. That seems like an awfully petty thing to complain about. Sometimes, it's an advantage, sometimes not, depending on who's parked where at the gas pumps.

  • cwesleyg avatar cwesleyg Posted: 4/23/2013 9:59am PDT

    I'm not surprised this car is not selling well. Chrysler's smaller cars have been pretty sad performers. Neons were nasty oil burning rust buckets, and how many people got burned by Chrysler's 2.7 v6? The quality of the competition is too good to bother buying what is probably a risky proposition. Further the lack of confidence in the Fiat brand here in the USA? I've known owners of Fiats and none were that thrilled... FIAT = Fix It Again Tony?

  • MoparJim avatar MoparJim Posted: 7/1/2013 4:05pm PDT

    Have a Neon with over 300k on it, stick..try again Chuck

  • BTank avatar BTank Posted: 7/9/2013 4:44pm PDT

    You're the rare exception, not the norm.

    Compartmentalize it to just your anecdotal experience, yea, Neon is a great car. For most others, a POS.

  • fb_1679005287 avatar Brad Posted: 3/26/2013 12:06pm PDT

    You are pathetic. The Kia and Hyundai are Korean and not Japanese. I guess that pretty much sums up the value of your opinion...

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 7:00pm PDT

    Yup; and both come with 100,000 mile power-train warranties and 60,000 mile bumper-to-bumper warranties.

  • Rocky36 avatar Rocky36 Posted: 1/22/2013 11:58am PST

    Bad name, bad design, enough said.

  • fb_514123874 avatar Andrew Posted: 6/20/2013 12:33am PDT

    i'm tired of people complaining that the dart is a 4 door, its a compact, and its a 4 cylinder, when the original dart was dodges smallest car, 2 or 4 door, came with an extremely weak slant six with less horsepower than this ones base 4 cylinder. WHATS THE DIFFERENCE? And yes you could get a dart swinger with a 318 but i doubt it had more than 220hp either. and yeah i'd buy one if i wasnt stuck with an 08 avenger. one day though i will buy up one of those "unsellable" 6 speed turbos. pansies. learn to drive a stick.

  • fb_100003591698837 avatar fb_100003591698837 Posted: 6/2/2013 10:59am PDT

    For all those on forums everywhere whining that they want this car or that car to have a manual transmission, THIS IS WHY THEY SHOULD NOT DO IT! MOST PEOPLE HATE MANUALS! Automatics are AS GOOD, AND MOST TIMES BETTER THAN MANUALS! Who wants to have to keep shifting all the time? NO ONE! MANUALS SUCK!

  • ratch avatar ratch Posted: 6/18/2013 6:51am PDT

    What happened to having OPTIONS?????? One used to be able to get most, not all , cars in EITHER manual or auto, and EITHER two- or four-door....

  • fb_513766519 avatar Dan Posted: 7/1/2013 8:44am PDT

    Manuals require that people focus more attention on driving, instead of gabbing or texting on their cell phone, doing their makeup, or reading the paper. Manual only sucks if you don't know how to drive one. Some of us like to be more involved in the driving experience and a autotragic trans doesn't allow for that.

  • ElectricFuture avatar ElectricFuture Posted: 1/22/2013 10:16am PST

    Despite how great the car is, I blame the horrible name. A lot of people would be embarrassed to admit they drive something called a dart.

  • fb_100003591698837 avatar fb_100003591698837 Posted: 6/2/2013 10:58am PDT

    There are so many cars with stupid names, and you think a name from the past like dart is bad? CLUELESS!

  • fb_100006328898348 avatar fb_100006328898348 Posted: 9/3/2013 8:25am PDT

    about as clueless as republican voter!

  • Jon1277 avatar Jon1277 Posted: 7/1/2013 11:20am PDT

    Wow is that an ignorant statement. You do realize that the Dart was originally a popular car from the 60s and 70s, right?

  • BTank avatar BTank Posted: 7/9/2013 4:35pm PDT

    You do realize 60s were FIFTY years ago?

    Old Dart was just a cheap grocery hauler econobox. Not the image you want for your "fun, sexy new Dart."

  • fb_1290932946 avatar Billy Posted: 7/19/2013 10:02am PDT

    The old Dart was a car you owned because that's all you could afford.

  • fb_1620175433 avatar William Posted: 1/22/2013 3:23pm PST

    Does it have a wop engine?

  • fb_1062099260 avatar Peter Posted: 1/22/2013 10:48am PST

    This is the second time in the last 2 years Chrysler expected immediate adoption but did not realize it takes time.Last summer Dart were not even on most show room's and when the Fiat500 debuted the same thing happened.Large car and truck builders who have not played in the small car field it's takes time.Fiat /Chrysler just over expect's when Ford and GM are making great small call's too.

  • fb_1433735000 avatar Patrick Posted: 1/22/2013 7:56pm PST

    Curious.

  • fb_100001117608025 avatar Ken Posted: 4/10/2013 11:06am PDT

    I didn't give it a look because there wasn't a hatch option.

  • MORE-Hatchbacks avatar MORE-Hatchbacks Posted: 4/23/2013 9:15am PDT

    @RichardRead; "Why Isn't The Dodge Dart Selling?" Simply put, it's not a hatchback, American consumers want a greater selection of larger sized hatchbacks and wagons, than the little that is offered in this country. Globally hatchbacks dominate the marketplace, the sedan is seen as boring and far less practical. Chrysler is too obsessed with it's line of gas guzzling SUV's, than building a car for the bulk of the consumers.

  • MORE-Hatchbacks avatar MORE-Hatchbacks Posted: 4/23/2013 9:18am PDT

    @RichardRead; "Why Isn't The Dodge Dart Selling?" Simply put, it's not a hatchback, American consumers want a greater selection of larger sized hatchbacks and wagons, than the little that is offered in this country. Globally hatchbacks dominate the marketplace, the sedan is seen as boring and far less practical. Chrysler is too obsessed with it's line of gas guzzling SUV's, than building a car for the bulk of the consumers.

  • unclebuck avatar unclebuck Posted: 6/1/2013 2:22pm PDT

    the market is calling for retro the design is ugly they need to look at the mustang,camero,& challenger the they need to keep the styles that sell forget the angles and wedge look remember car are to be sexy shapes. curves around the wheel wells impressive nose spoiler on tail. Lessen to your customers

  • fb_1067927339 avatar Bill Posted: 6/2/2013 3:58am PDT

    better yet..roll out another 5 thousand 1970 dodge challengers out of the same mold with all high performance engines..Tv is killing all the old cool cars!!!

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 6:52pm PDT

    Very few people under 50 years old in the US have ever driven a stick shift. I would buy one in a truck, but not for an everyday car sitting in rush-hour traffic.

  • fb_100003983249238 avatar Sean Posted: 6/18/2013 7:07pm PDT

    Very few people under 50 years old in the US have ever driven a stick shift. I would buy one in a truck, but not for an everyday car sitting in rush-hour traffic.

  • fb_540593066 avatar Jake Posted: 7/1/2013 8:03am PDT

    i'd say its probably because it isn't a Dodge Dart. it may wear the nameplate, but the Dart wasn't a little European putt putt econobox fiat. It was a smaller muscle car with lots of high performance options and even more potential. Chrysler took an Icon from the height of Americas auto history, and desecrated it

  • fb_513766519 avatar Dan Posted: 7/1/2013 8:38am PDT

    Here's a few reasons why it isn't selling;

    1. They b@stardized a venerable name (see Charger for another misbadged car)

    2. They took 2 bailouts in 30 years, and people get sick of watching companies get bailouts at the expense of taxpayers.

    3. It's ugly as sin.

  • fb_100000899984299 avatar Michael Posted: 7/1/2013 11:38am PDT

    They should have saved the Dart name for a vehicle that could have accommodated a V-8. Offer it bare bones at a low price and they would have had a winner. A Hemi Dart would have been so cool!

  • fb_100000203726337 avatar Johnny Posted: 7/3/2013 7:56am PDT

    I've read a lot of bad reviews about this car, too. Cheap interior, such as air conditioning vents breaking and falling out of the dash. Now that's cheap. Also, the cars have a tendency not to start in cold weather; a brand new car not starting in the morning because there's snow on the ground is extremely annoying. I don't recall reading any good reviews for this car.

  • 8o88y avatar 8o88y Posted: 7/5/2013 8:03pm PDT

    It's really sad how few people know how to drive manual cars these days.
    -- A chief problem with this car is it has identity. The car doesn't attract Dodge fans, and it doesn't attract European-car fans. It's too too obviously a rebadged Italian car. Chevy had similar problems with rebadged Isuzus and Daewoos in the past. Ford did its "world-car" campaign more effectively, except with the Merkur and Contour.
    -- I worked on FIATs in the 70s, and I think that much of their reliability problem had to do with American car dealers who didn't fully pre-deliver them. American cars then had about a dozen items to check, and FIATs had about 100, and instead of taking 20 minutes, it could take 45 mins to 2 hrs.

  • fb_1091109212 avatar Shawn Posted: 7/8/2013 9:16am PDT

    I love the Dart and may have purchased one but it along with the focus and other small cars have a to small back seat . Can anyone seriously look at these cars with the front seats all the way back and think someone older than 2 is going to want to sit there . How hard would it be to kep the same basic style but add a little length so that there was a few more inches in the back seat . I have teenage kids now and I like small cars for the mileage but am forced to buy bigger so they can get their legs in front of them .

  • RufusTBeauregard avatar RufusTBeauregard Posted: 7/8/2013 4:14pm PDT

    Because it has the build quality of a Fiat and the prestige and brand recognition of a Dodge?

  • fb_1535432230 avatar Ronnie Posted: 7/8/2013 7:26pm PDT

    Put a small, all aluminum,direct injected V8 (DOHC) with a 7speed auto and Rear wheel Drive in it.

    They could sell all they can make.

    Styling is ok. Interior materials etc,ok

  • mufdvrss396 avatar mufdvrss396 Posted: 7/8/2013 8:15pm PDT

    Just another boring dull 4 door grocery getter!

  • loosertb1 avatar loosertb1 Posted: 7/9/2013 11:59am PDT

    first of all.. its a fiat... i wouldn't want to trade it back in 3 years... it won't have any resale value anyway... it might not even last that long...

  • fb_1290932946 avatar Billy Posted: 7/19/2013 9:55am PDT

    Because it looks like every other crappy little import.

  • techmotor avatar techmotor Posted: 9/6/2013 7:42am PDT

    Hy Guys, someone can help me?

    Where Can I edit my profile?

  • fb_100003777996471 avatar Chloe Posted: 2/1/2014 5:42pm PST

    I love my 2014 dodge dart sxt rallye edition. for 19,000 fully loaded you cant beat it. Has alot more power then you would think.

  • fb_1363527735 avatar Isaac Posted: 5/30/2014 2:50pm PDT

    Needs to be a two door

  • busterbox avatar busterbox Posted: 7/1/2014 1:14am PDT

    I personally think if they would had called it the "New Neon" and it came in automatic, the thing would sold like hotcakes.

  • Turbo tap  avatar Turbo tap Posted: 8/15/2014 9:58pm PDT

    I agree with Isaac, should have made it a 2dr! Sure do miss all the 2dr cars of the past like the Celica, Corolla, Supra, Paseo, Turcell, del Sol, S2000, Prelude, Neon, Laser, Conquest, Omni, Focus, Probe, Escort & RX-7 just to name a few. Most were reasonably priced, fun to drive but are now gone, replaced with 4dr only versions or premium priced like the 370Z. Not everyone wants a SUV or 4dr sedans! There is a huge segment lacking and nothing for the youth to get excited about, who's excited about a 2dr Elantra?! Also, I think Neon would have been a better name.