RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

The new caravan seems to be making a transition to a crossover vehicle of you ask me. If I was held at gun point to choose a van I would probibly choose the new caravan.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

I just don't get the crossover, but as stated previously, I never lusted after an SUV. The thing I love about the Challenger is that across the spectrum, it's impracticality will be offset by it's intended application.

For the majority, SUV's, in this country, IMHO, serve the purpose of allaying any distaste or perceived uncoolness of being seen in a mini-van. Typically soccer moms hauling kids and groceries. So the crossover, to me, seems like the evolution of the SUV back into a minivan because it's a tool that has been over used and typically used for the wrong purpose.

Mirada, the one exception I give to the Avenger, is the exact same one you mention. The StormTrooper Avenger, is a powerful looking vehicle. The rest of the avengers...mini Chargers morphed w/ Caliber front ends or vise versa.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

As has been mentioned, car designs as a whole go in cycles. I remember when the new 1996 Ford Taurus came out, which Ford proudly touted its revolutionary ovoid shape, even bragging that "you won't find a straight line on this car anywhere...". This car was anything but "boxy"... and boy was it ugly - Ford pretty much admitted the same by redesigning the car completely as soon as 2000.

I guess my point is, you can have "boxy" shapes and aerodynamic "ovoid" shapes - just find a fine line between the 2, that's the real trick.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

Ahhh this is why we build cars so differently. Just like fashion, its only old until someone brings it back out again. Everything old is new again so to say. I own an 88 Conquest TSI and 91 Stealth R/T and they are polar opposites. The TSI is square and has very straight lines. But the R/T is round and curvy. I love both of my daily drivers and find them both very attractive. So I guess beauty lies in the eye of the beholder after all. Dodge will have to wait and see if their idea of beauty is the same as their buying publics.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

I have an 06 Grand Caravan SXT. I like the design of it and the color Butane Blue. The new 08's I really don't care about the design. It's too sharp edged, squared off in the back. The 84's when they came out for the first year. That was a box on wheels.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

Just got back to NW Jersey from VA. PA finally has finished on 78 and 81 after 15 years (no exageration) that I know of since I've been coming to NJ. I got teary as I went to VA w/ no construction AND came back w/ no construction, I can only imagine it will last just this very brief period...so I'll remember these heady times...oh....yeah....point...


So, I am about to contradict myself Conquest/Starion boxy. Good. Nice designs. OK so it's not always about organic, I'll just say it this way....a design theme works or doesn't and the stuff they got going now (other than previously stated exceptions) don't. They're just vapid.

I liked the Dynasty (K car), I even liked the LeBarron original....and of course loved my Horizon (boxy fat Rabbit lookin' thing)

I just can't groove on what they've got cookin' now. It ain't Pontiac Aztec ugly, but too damned close for Chrysler for my taste.

Basically, growing up in a Chrysler house, I could always justify less than stellar service records with well designed aesthetically pleasing automobiles. People won't buy not good looking cars, I hope they do some more focus groups, or get some w/o myopia.

RE: Dodge needs to go in a different design direction
 

I have to agree, Dodge has become way too boxy and some of the models look too much alike. If you look back on the late 90s, each car had its own identity to a degree. The Neon looked unique and aerodynamic without a real grille, the Stratus was the only one to have a high (traditional) grille, the Intrepid had a lower grille which made it look like the Viper, the Avenger although having a lower grille was a coupe and had a different look than the Intrepid. The Dakota did look like a baby Ram, which was acceptable as it looked very good and the Durango looked a lot like the Dakota naturally. That in my opinion was the peak of Dodge's styling in recent history. Now here is what is wrong

Avenger:
Although there are things I like about the car. It looks like a cross between a Caliber and Charger. The attempted four door coupe look might work on the Charger, but it seems just plain pathetic on the Avenger and it creates an annoying blind spot. The R/T model looks good but some of the other versions sometimes make me think of the Cobalt (ICK!).

Caliber:
I have never for one minuet like this car in any way shape or form. I looks like a box on wheels. The CVTs don't help my opinion or the fact that they get such terrible fuel mileage for what they are.

Nitro:
How can anyone mistake this for anything but a box on wheels.

Magnum:
I'm sorry but every single time I see one of those things, I see a 1985 Ford LTD Stationwagon (ick! ick! ICK!).

Caravan:
My parents have a 2002 Caravan and they were talking about trading it in since it has 115K on it (which is really not that many miles for how well they hold up), but the new ones look like a return to the 80s so I'm suggesting either they find a left over 2007 or hold out until this one has 200K or more on it. I liked the rounder look personally, plus the interior was nicer on the 2001-2007 models.

1 Bad Mirada, I agree the StormTrooper Avenger looks excellent. I would be very tempted by one of those.