We reported earlier on the gold standard in this genre: Scott Burgess' Aspen Hybrid review. Clearly, USA Today car reviewer James R. Healey suffers from the same truth-telling conundrum: how do you diss a hybrid, even if it's a ridiculous idea whose absurdity is only matched by its shoddy execution? You know there's trouble right from the headline: "Chrysler's hybrid SUVs pull in near front of pack." Near? What pack? The pack of hybrid SUVs? Yup. "What makes Chrysler models superior to GM's?" Healey asks. Talk about the wrong question. (The answer is price, apparently.) After that bogus comparo, Healey gets down to business, and it ain't good for ChryCo. "Starting from a dead stop was lazy unless you pushed hard on the throttle, thus undoing the fuel-economy benefits (but generating lots of fun from the willing and eager Hemi V-8). Once underway, the hybrid's switching among modes was accompanied by tiny jerks and shimmies… As with most hybrids [?], there's a shudder when the gas engine fires up to aid the electrics, but it was barely noticeable in the Durango. The bulky battery pack under the second-row seat was a hurdle for access to the third row." Oh, and "Quiet: But electric motor whines at low speed."
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
This is the truck I always was waiting for. I need a heavy battery pack added on to an overweight truck obstructing the cargo bay and compared to 12mpg I will now get 19 all for what $40,000. Let’s get real, even chrysler offers a minivan with more useable space and higher gas millege and better all around performance then this. Is this so that Nardelli could say, I am starting to turn out the products Americans want? The bragging rights to a hy-brid truck versus the actuality of selling hundreds of thousands in the marketplace (ala toyota). Perhaps this will be the base line for GM ford & Chrysler to go to Congress and say we are really on to something here and for say 40-50 Billion of governemental loans and tax credit we can push it accross the finish line. Remember it’s only a couple years since Suburbans, expeditions and yes hummers got business tax breaks for bringing what to the party? I think it was a 6000 lb minimum weight. IF the government put’s any money into making giant suv’s ordinary guzzlers instead of super guzzlers, we the taxpayers should revolt.
IF the government put’s any money into making giant suv’s ordinary guzzlers instead of super guzzlers, we the taxpayers should revolt.
You mean the endless bankster-bailouts (Bear Stearns, JPMorgan, Fannie, Freddie, et al) isn’t enough for you? The grabvernment government is already pissing our tax money away, so don’t wait. Learn to love the Black Market Economy.
(Sorry for the off-topic, but do we really need to say anything at all about this hybrid dinosaur? Isn’t the fact that they actually built one an insult to the consumer’s intelligence?)
So who wins in a comparison between the Hybrid Aspen and the Hybrid Tahoe?
Oh, that’s right. That’s like picking a favorite between gonarrhea and syphilis.
So, a V8, full-size SUV capable of seating 7, towing a real object, and attaining 22MPG is somehow bad?
My family owned a 4 passenger(5 if you count the 6″ wide rear center seat) I6 Grand Cherokee for a while during the SUV boom– it was capable of turning out around 175 horsepower, and consistently returned 21MPG, the average via the trip computer. A 5.2 equipped Ram(with 250k miles) in the family returns 17.5MPG like clockwork.
That Grand Cherokee cost my Father $32,000. In 1998.
It’s now 2008, and the same company is offering 3 more seats, twice the power and an extra mile-per-gallon, for the price of a 5.2 Grand Cherokee adjusted to today’s dollars.
I fail to see why this is a bad car? Please help me to understand.
iNeon- There’s nothing wrong with it. The 98 GC was EPA rated at 14 city 19 highway so imagine if the Durango Hybrid was driven carefully like your families GC was you might get 23-24 MPG.
There’s also nothing wrong with the regular Durango. A car buyer or reviewer who doesn’t like the Durango is not likely to like the Hybrid version. The Hybrid is for people who would have bought the Durango but would also like to use less fuel.
That Durango chassis is a bit long on tooth. The Dodge version only netted 384 sales in July – It was outsold by the discontinued Pacific, which sold 447 units in July.
So, why all the flack for a step in what is, so obviously, the right direction?
Chrysler isn’t left with much of their own, and this may not count since it’s shared technology, but at least it isn’t a 28mpg compact.
Credit where it’s due, guys.
I have to wonder why they did this. Is it a cheap way to say, “Hey! We’re green! We have a hybrid!” Does that get a checkmark in some corporate marketing box? That would be a colossal waste of time.
Or do they think this will actually increase sales of the vehicle? Have they checked to see how well it’s working for GM? OK… it’s cheaper… but it’s not as good, anyway.
Let the market sort it out. Free market supply and demand will sort this hybrid suv game out. Just play fair, no government handouts.
Aren’t they shutting that plant down next year?
Regardless of the mpg increase, this vehicle is completely pointless in current market conditions. If you are a family on a budget and need towing and 7 seat capacity then you can get a less than two year old Durango for between $10-12K dollars. That is the core of the Durango problem – it is just not a very desirable vehicle regardless of which drivetrain its fitted with.