Advertisement
Find a Car
Go!

Why Isn't The Dodge Dart Selling?

By Richard Read
Richard Read Richard Read
Reporter BIO
Richard Read covers technology, social media, advertising, legal issues, and other auto industry topics for High Gear Media. With a background in... More

LATEST ARTICLE
Who Can Protect Our Cars From Hackers? NHTSA Can!
Fully autonomous cars are still years away from hitting the roads, and the U.S. probably won't be... Read More
  • #8LEADERBOARD RANK
  • 2892ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED
  • 428COMMENTS POSTED

57 69,302 views Jan 22, 2013
Follow Richard

2013 Dodge Dart

HI-RES GALLERY: 2013 Dodge Dart

When the all-new Dodge Dart debuted at last year's Detroit Auto Show, the media was excited. It marked the revival of a once-loved nameplate and the first major collaboration between Chrysler and its new Italian owners (since the Dart is based on a Fiat platform). And for a reasonably priced compact sedan, the 2013 Dart offered a range of options to please driving enthusiasts.

The reception from the general public, however, has been more muted -- so much so that, according to AutoNews, Chrysler executives have taken pains to explain the Dart's underwhelming sales.


The problem has been brewing for a while. In fact, we drew attention to it last summer, when fewer than 1,000 Darts sold over the course of two months. Things picked up in the fall, and the Dart finished 2012 with 25,303 units sold. But although the needle is moving in the right direction, Chrysler clearly believed that the Dart would be performing better by now.

A major stumble came as the first wave of Dodge Darts rolled out to greet the public, fitted with manual transmissions. While the number of shoppers interested in stick-shifters seems to be growing, it still accounts for a tiny percentage of the buying public. Those first manual-only models turned off automatic fans and prevented more than a few consumers from taking the Dart for a spin.

In fairness, the automatics arrived a few weeks later, but by then, buzz about the Dart had begun to wane. It was by no means old hat, but it wasn't brand spanking new, either.

Also causing trouble: the Dart's optional dual-clutch transmission, which, by CEO Sergio Marchionne's own admission, was too European for U.S. drivers. Speaking at last week's Detroit Auto Show, Marchionne took much of the blame for trying to force Americans to use a transmission they didn't like. Speaking to CNN, he said, "I take full ownership for the fact that it wasn't the launch that I wanted."

Sales may perk up when the Dart receives Chrysler/Fiat's new nine-speed automatic transmission, which will soon debut on the successor to the Jeep Liberty. There's no word, however, on precisely when that gearbox will be available for the Dart. Speaking to Wards Auto, Marchionne said, "If it were up to me, you would have gotten it last night." 

Reid Bigland, head of the Dodge brand, says that he's not too concerned about the Dart's sluggish sales figures, because he has a number of "levers" he can pull to boost volume. One of those levers is undoubtedly the launch of the Dodge Dart GT, slated to arrive in the second quarter of 2013. That could help regain the attention of performance fans, which could, in turn, generate new excitement about the Dart.

Will that be enough? Only time will tell. The Dart has a lot going for it, including a strong parent company with booming sales and a CEO whose aggressive approach to reinventing Chrysler has been successful, by and large.

On the other hand, as a compact sedan, the Dart has entered one of the toughest segments in the auto market. It's got to eat away at territory long-since claimed by the likes of the Ford Focus, the Honda Civic, and the Toyota Corolla. True, it would be unwise for Chrysler to avoid the segment altogether, but it's a very big gamble. We'll keep you posted.


Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (57)

  1. ElectricFuture avatar Electric Future 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.
     
    Post Reply
    -4
    Bad stuff?

  2. fb_1062099260 avatar Peter Anastopulos 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. R1954 avatar Rich Ziolkowski 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

  4. Rocky36 avatar Craig Hall Posted: 1/22/2013 11:58am PST

    Bad name, bad design, enough said.
     
    Post Reply
    -2
    Bad stuff?

  5. Annatar avatar Annatar Last Name (Required) 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

     

  6. ModernMode avatar M A 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  7. Annatar avatar Annatar Last Name (Required) 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

     

  8. fb_100003069108896 avatar John Dozer 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  9. 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  10. fb_100005087826587 avatar Sjonnie van der Kist 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  11. fb_1620175433 avatar William Cervini Posted: 1/22/2013 3:23pm PST

    Does it have a wop engine?
     
    Post Reply
    -6
    Bad stuff?

  12. texmotodad avatar Perry Ford 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  13. fb_711380461 avatar Lee Searles Posted: 1/22/2013 6:54pm PST

    Needs more HP. End of story.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

  14. fb_1131811354 avatar Ray Hathaway 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.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

  15. fb_1433735000 avatar Patrick Korst Posted: 1/22/2013 7:56pm PST

    Curious.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  16. fb_82100996 avatar Richard Shanks 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +4
    Bad stuff?

  17. bigmone75 avatar Maimane M'Boya Posted: 1/23/2013 6:41am PST

    Waiting for SRT to do their thing
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  18. jestyler avatar Thomas Waits 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
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  19. fb_3614143 avatar Sam Miller-Christiansen 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  20. fb_636251774 avatar David Russell 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.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

  21. fb_1170042516 avatar Jeff Durgin 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  22. fb_1805887840 avatar Frank Chrastina 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  23. fb_1567092218 avatar Bruce Ferguson 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  24. fb_1520407223 avatar Guido Nero FL Posted: 4/15/2013 12:40pm PDT

    That is because it's way over weight for it segment !
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  25. fb_100000105026626 avatar Dan Meyers 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!
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

     

  26. fb_851130444 avatar Dan Boulanger 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).
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  27. dialate avatar Test Testerson 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  28. 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

  29. fb_110001131 avatar Caleb DeMarco 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.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  30. fb_1121490272 avatar Anthony Harkin 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  31. fb_7032897 avatar Jeremy Busby 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  32. fb_7032897 avatar Jeremy Busby Posted: 3/15/2013 8:27am PDT

    Too stupid / lazy to drive a manual transmission...to clarify.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  33. fb_1679005287 avatar Brad Bouillon 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...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  34. fb_1679005287 avatar Brad Bouillon 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...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  35. fb_1304134328 avatar Johnathan Bodily 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.
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  36. fb_100000447486182 avatar Jim Finseth Posted: 3/30/2013 1:39pm PDT

    Agreed. We all laugh at losers who drive cars made in Korea.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

     

  37. Blux avatar Cody Habitz 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  38. fb_100000447486182 avatar Jim Finseth Posted: 3/30/2013 1:39pm PDT

    It is just crap. Another version of a Yugo. Cheap is cheap. Plain and simple.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  39. ToppCat avatar Terry Chan 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!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  40. fb_100001117608025 avatar Ken Silva Posted: 4/10/2013 11:06am PDT

    I didn't give it a look because there wasn't a hatch option.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  41. fb_1520407223 avatar Guido Nero FL 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 ?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  42. fb_100000321034945 avatar Shawn Scanlon 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  43. Crazylooie avatar Crazy Looie Posted: 4/17/2013 10:11am PDT

    There are only 2 things wrong with this article, the style and the content.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  44. vitsing avatar Ken L Posted: 4/19/2013 1:27am PDT

    Like the Volt you can not sell something the consumer does not want. Duh - pull the plug.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  45. fb_100000479788207 avatar Don Alphonse Rigatoni 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!!!!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  46. fb_1248923625 avatar Richard Rivera 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  47. cwesleyg avatar Charles Grove Posted: 4/23/2013 10:05am PDT

    Agree 100%. 4 doors are not cool.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  48. 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  49. fb_100001724001837 avatar Rex Reddy 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  50. cwesleyg avatar Charles Grove 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  51. TonyAnz avatar Tony Anz Posted: 4/22/2013 8:35am PDT

    It's fugly. Plain and simple.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  52. MORE-Hatchbacks avatar Jim Maynard 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  53. MORE-Hatchbacks avatar Jim Maynard 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  54. cwesleyg avatar Charles Grove 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?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  55. jmopar1 avatar joseph miller 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
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  56. patpur avatar Patrick Purcell 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  57. trapperpg avatar phil greene 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.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Advertisement
Get great deals on the 2013 Dodge Dart!
By clicking above, you agree that your data will be subject to our Car Quotes Privacy Policy
Advertisement
Advertisement

More From High Gear Media

 
 
The Car Connection
 
 
© 2013 The Car Connection. All Rights Reserved. The Car Connection is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.