Find Reviews by Make:
The Duster moniker alone should be enough to tell you that this compact ute won’t be coming to the US, but it’s a crucial new addition to Renault’s low-cost Dacia lineup. Dacia is making serious inroads in Europe, as a combination of C4C schemes and the rediscovered love of frugality has firmly put the Renault budget brand at the top of the growth charts. CUVs are hot in Europe, but if the Tiguan’s nose-bleed price is a put-off, the Duster is available for about half the price. And you know, that’s not half bad.
Unless Chrysler has used the Duster name somehow in the past 25 years, Dacia would be well within its rights to use the name.
Ford failed to do this with the GT40 name and (after failing to buy it back from the guy who had taken it over) ended-up with just “GT”. (It is said this is one reason Ford made a special-edition Cobra Mustang to maintain ownership over the “Cobra” name.)
I don’t think it is a question of rights. It is more a question of wrongs. The name duster for a car should lie unused until everyone who ever saw a Plymouth Duster, has been dead for a hundred years.
Dacia actually used the name in the 1980s to sell these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARO_10 in the UK. Of course that Dacia Duster was better known for being cheap rather than good, like so many Commie cars, but they still sold to skinflints and may actually have a positive reputation.
The really cool duster is this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M42_Duster/
I think Duster is a name Chrysler should have brought back, but they killed Plymouth, so what’s the point?
Nice try Dacia. However if it doesn’t have the Twister on it, it ain’t really a Duster now is it?
http://www.cartype.com/pics/1610/full/duster_twister_71-73.jpg