The Dodge Avenger was the very bottom of the barrel in the mid-size sedan segment when it was launched. It excelled at nothing and sold poorly compared to its predecessor, relying on heavy incentives. It was so underdone that even when Chrysler fixed some of its most egregious faults with the 2011 refresh and improved it from a subpar car to at least average, the lingering funk kept the Avenger on automotive journalists’ and commenters’ lists of the worst new cars.
The platform underpinning the Avenger – known as the Chrysler JS platform – was a relatively solid foundation. The Avenger shared it with the Chrysler Sebring and both were related to the Dodge Caliber and Journey and Jeep Compass and Patriot. JS had started out as a co-developed platform with Mitsubishi, Chrysler making changes after DaimlerChrysler and Mitsubishi ended their partnership in 2004.
Mitsubishi’s version of the platform, known as GS, survives today underneath the Mitsubishi Outlander, Outlander Sport (ASX/RVR), Lancer, and Eclipse Cross. None of those cars are class leaders but they don’t embarrass themselves, thereby proving the platform itself is fairly sound.
Unfortunately, it’s what DaimlerChrysler put atop it that sucked. Simply put, you were better served buying literally any other mid-size sedan on the market in 2008. That included not only the stalwart Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, but also the Pontiac G6, Ford Fusion, Saturn Aura, Kia Optima, Hyundai Sonata and Chevrolet Malibu. Even the Mitsubishi Galant was a better choice at the time, before Mitsubishi starved it of updates and it assumed the mantle of worst car in the mid-size segment.
What was so bad about the Avenger? Let’s start with its most damning fault, the interior. The basic dashboard design was inoffensive and relatively ergonomic. Unfortunately, the material quality was awful. Like, first-generation Kia Rio awful. The plastics weren’t just hard, they looked hard. And cheap. And indifferently assembled. Let’s not forget the overly firm seats with their slippery, bargain-basement leather trim or the stain-resistant but cheerless cloth trim. Even high-spec models, with their extra bits of shiny “metal” trim, looked worse inside than a base model Camry or Accord.
The lower-line Avengers’ interiors were just embarrassing. If they’d been screwed together a little bit better, you might be able to argue the interior was “hardy” and “no-nonsense” but they weren’t and the interior instead was just dreary and low-rent. Even worse, the high beltline made the interior feel confining.
Over the years, the Big Detroit 3 have often been criticized for making you buy a top-line (or near-top) model to get a “good one”. For example, GM made you pony up for a Pontiac G6 GTP or Chevrolet Malibu SS just to get a V6 that merely matched the standard V6 in an Accord or Camry. This definitely applied to the Avenger.
The standard engine was the 2.4 four-cylinder “World” engine, co-developed with Hyundai and Mitsubishi as part of the Global Engine Alliance. Although it produced an adequate 173 hp and 166 ft-lbs, it came only with a four-speed automatic and was noisy and unrefined.
In the mid-level SXT, you could get a 2.7 V6 producing scarcely more power and torque – 189 hp and 191 ft-lbs. It, too, was mated to a four-speed automatic although in certain overseas markets like Australia it had a six-speed automatic. The 2.7’s sludge issues had been resolved by the time the Avenger launched but, by then, its power and torque figures were well behind the rest of the class. This was the 2000s after all, the decade of the mid-size sedan horsepower wars. The 2.7 couldn’t even best most rivals’ more powerful V6s in fuel economy.
Overseas markets also had a 2.0 “World” four, as seen in the Dodge Caliber, which produced an underwhelming 154 hp and 140 ft-lbs. This was scarcely enough to haul around 3400 pounds of Avenger, although it was available with a five-speed manual. (There was also a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it turbo diesel Avenger, using a Volkswagen-sourced 2.0 with a six-speed manual)
Even the “good” powertrain, the 3.5 V6 and 6-speed automatic in the flagship R/T, couldn’t match the power and torque figures of the Accord and Camry, producing 235 hp and 232 ft-lbs and mustering only 16/26 mpg. The 2008-only all-wheel-drive R/T achieved a truly atrocious 15/24 mpg score, which was V8 gas mileage.
The R/T had a firmer suspension than the regular Avenger but still didn’t handle with the alacrity of, say, a Mazda6. That was pretty disappointing for something both aggressively styled and emblazoned with the R/T logo. Regular Avengers used the same suspension tune as the Sebring and were utterly forgettable to drive with numb steering and so-so handling albeit relatively decent ride quality, depending on who you asked. The Avenger had Charger styling but Camry dynamics. At least the Camry had some decent engines…
Over the years, Detroit has also been criticized for releasing cars that couldn’t match imports in quality or refinement and which instead relied on gimmicks to sell. Gimmicks were about all the Avenger had in its repertoire, including heated and cooled cupholders, a chilled glovebox, fold-flat front passenger seat, and stain-resistant YES Essentials fabric. Optional was a MyGIG touchscreen infotainment system with a 20GB hard drive and a USB port for transferring data, pretty impressive for 2008.
There was only one other area in which the Avenger stood out in a good way. That was its unmistakably American, Charger-esque styling, Chrysler designers trying to make a statement with the car to help it in European and Asia-Pacific markets. Given the surprising international success of the Chrysler 300, it was a strategy that had some merit. After all, the Avenger could compete on little else other than price and equipment and that left it exceedingly vulnerable in cutthroat markets like Europe.
Ryan Nagode’s design was a mixed bag. On one hand, the visual link to the Charger was unmistakeable, the front-wheel-drive Avenger boasting its larger brother’s aggressive haunches. Unfortunately, the platform’s proportions left the car looking rather tall and stubby even though the car was an inch both taller and longer than the Toyota Camry. In my eyes, it was mostly attractive. In your eyes, it may be ugly. At least we can all agree it was better-looking than the bizarre, overwrought Sebring.
I was excited when the Avenger was launched in Australia, the first mid-size Dodge to make the long trip over here. Given the dearth of American cars here, it was a delight to see Chrysler expand their Australian model range and offer not just one but two mid-size sedans. Then the reviews came out and dimmed my enthusiasm – there was praise for the Avenger’s styling and feature content but little else. Even the European-spec suspension tuning of Australian-market Avengers couldn’t elevate the brash Dodge above the Camry in the fun-to-drive stakes, while the cars’ build quality further enforced local stereotypes about American cars and their lack of attention-to-detail and polish.
Sitting in one was enough to completely turn me off. At the time, my sister had a Mitsubishi 380 (Aussie-market Galant). It had some cheap trim here and there and the silver plastic center stack looked dated almost right away. Nevertheless, it was a Lexus next to the Avenger. Aussies avoided the Avenger and it limped on until 2010 (the Caliber and Nitro quickly posted double-digit declines and disappeared a year later). It couldn’t even last that long in Europe, disappearing after 2009.
The reviews were no more positive in the Avenger’s homeland, the brand new sedan coming 7th out of 7 mid-size sedans in a 2008 Car & Driver comparison test. Europeans were unimpressed, too, beyond the basic pounds-for-your-pounds value aspect.
From 1997 until 2005, Dodge shifted around 100k Stratuses each year. The Avenger couldn’t even reach that in its debut year, reaching only 83k units. By 2009, it was selling less than half that. For comparison, Pontiac sold more than twice as many G6s in 2009 in spite of its corporate parent’s bankruptcy spectacle and the impending death of the division. The Avenger did manage to sell more than rivals like the Galant, Mazda6, Subaru Legacy and Mercury Milan but Chrysler managed this with a glut of fleet sales.
Fiat acquired more and more of Chrysler after its bankruptcy and made a serious effort to fix Chrysler’s fleet of often underwhelming, underdone cars. Key to that was a healthy investment in improving interior quality. For 2011, the Avenger received an entirely new, vastly better-quality interior with attractive, soft-touch plastics (although some hard surfaces remained). There were mechanical improvements, too: the four-cylinder was now available with an optional six-speed automatic while the two V6s were replaced with a single, more powerful V6, the 3.6 Pentastar with a class-leading 283 horsepower.
Though the Avenger would only live for a few more years and would never again reach the sales heights of the Stratus, Fiat’s improvements instantly reversed the car’s sales slide. In fact, in both 2012 and 2013 Dodge shifted more than 90k units. The car still wasn’t a class-leader and the mediocre four-cylinder engine was carried over but the Avenger was now a competent if unexceptional mid-size sedan.
And yet, the jeers continued unabated from bloggers and commenters. Dodge had so royally messed up the ’08 Avenger that the stench lingered. Dodge’s macho marketing had presented the ’08 Avenger as a dynamic, fun-to-drive, powerful mid-size sedan. In reality, it was an unexciting, underpowered, unrefined, underdone sedan. And though the 2011 refresh went a long way towards righting the Avenger’s wrongs, it couldn’t resolve them completely and, for some, it couldn’t redeem the Avenger name.
Related Reading:
Dodge Goes Global: Taking a Plastic Fork to a Knife Fight
Chrysler’s Deadly Sin #4 – 2007-10 Chrysler Sebring: Way, Way Off Track
Future Classic/Driving Impressions: 2011-19 Dodge Journey FWD V6 – The NeverEnding Sale
These are actually really common used cars around here… much more so than their sales figures would imply. A couple of my coworkers have them and I’ve ridden in plenty, and drove a new rental version around 2010 (pre-update). I ridden in the updated versions and drove a Chrysler 200 rental and the improvement from the update was definitely huge.
The interior on the original 2008 version is ungodly awful. It’s not just the look of it, but the feeling of the door handles and controls, the cheap hollow sound the doors make, etc. It just has that instantly disintegrating loose plastic feel of a 1990s GM small car like a Cavalier or Grand Am. The 2011 update made a world of difference, and improved the suspension too. I actually really liked the 2013 Chrysler 200 I rented and apart from the obviously dated 4-cylinder/4-speed combo (which it only had because it was a rental), it was just as pleasant to drive as my dad’s 2011 Camry, maybe even a touch smoother.
They are cheap now – you can find them on craigslist for $2000-$4000 all day long, which is like half what a similar-age Camry or Accord will cost. And they seem to hold up much better in beater duty than the Stratus, most of which seemed to have vanished off the roads already only 13 years after production ended. The Stratus is one of the few modern cars where a total engine failure between 100k-150k was not uncommon (with the 2.7), not even mentioning all the other substandard components. I see quite a few Avengers and Sebrings with over 200k, so that’s an improvement at least.
Yep, these are a favorite of the BHPH/bad-credit crowd in the poorer parts of Indy. Typically seen with limo tint and body damage, but they seem to truck along alright with that 2.4L motor.
My wife’s friend and her sister were bought matching Avengers by their father to drive through medical school, I’m sure they got a fantastic deal. The updated 2011+(?) interiors are a marked improvement over the earlier cars.
I worked at a Chrysler dealership when these were new. These were for the people with marginal credit with no other choice besides maybe a 200/Sebring, which is the same car anyways. The customers were thrilled. Even though the Avenger is crude by Toyota standards, the most appealing thing was that you had a decent looking brand new car that wasn’t an embarrassment to drive. At least you could retain some dignity with these compared to something like a Nissan Versa. Although not the best car in any category, it served it’s purpose well where I lived. After coming from a rusted out barely running Chevy Cavaliers (by far the most traded car at our dealer), these were like driving a Bentley. Like the Journey, you get a lot of car for the money, but don’t expect it to light your world in fire.
Yep I think a lot of “enthusiasts” miss this aspect: no it’s not refined compared to the class best. But coming from some rusted out barely running jalopy, an Avenger feels like a spaceship.
From what I read, Daimler basically ravaged Chrysler for their own benefit and then disposed of the remains when it was of no more use. Chrysler designers and engineers were actually reduced to a 50% development budget in relation to their competitors. Now that I know this, I just feel sorry for them. I presume they knew they were releasing an automotive blight with the Avenger but they couldn’t actually do anything about it due to the Daimler overlords.
This is pretty much correct. Chrysler’s had a very rough 20 years.
During the Daimler era, the dictate came down that Chrysler Group’s budgets were being reduced by 40%. The “merger of equals” was effectively a hostile takeover, shepherded through by Chrysler’s executive leadership because they all got huge paydays for it. The alleged benefits never fully materialized because ze Germans were basically unwilling to sully themselves by letting Chrysler have Daimler bits and vice versa (the German version of “not designed here,” basically). Daimler was bleeding cash going into the 2000s, while Chrysler Corporation was healthy and profitable, so Daimler stripped the life and cash out of Chrysler, then discarded them as soon as they could manage it.
Cerberus, for their part, was just a VC firm hoping to break the company apart and sell the pieces. But, the Great Recession hit first, so the out was the government-brokered “merger” with Fiat (mostly since Sergio Marchionne was the only one crazy enough to take that bet).
Of course, Fiat-Chrysler has its own share of issues.
I think Daimler really thought that they could improve Chrysler. But their rigid “our way is the only way” attitude drove off so much talent that Chrysler lost the innovative personality that had made it so profitable up to that point. I also believe that Daimler of the era struggled with building cars to a price. The stuff coming from Germany in those years was pretty grim in terms of durability. And you are absolutely right that Daimler stole all of the cash being generated by the Chrysler Profit Machine and propped up its money-losing Mercedes operation. Of course the previous 5 years under GM-trained Robert Eaton didn’t do the company any favors either. The stuff designed during his time was highly popular and profitable, but was not designed for durability or long life at all.
Jake wrote:
“From what I read, Daimler basically ravaged Chrysler for their own benefit and then disposed of the remains when it was of no more use. Chrysler designers and engineers were actually reduced to a 50% development budget in relation to their competitors. Now that I know this, I just feel sorry for them. I presume they knew they were releasing an automotive blight with the Avenger but they couldn’t actually do anything about it due to the Daimler overlords.”
Jake read correctly. Prior to the “merger” with Chrysler, Daimler-Benz was a financial trainwreck. Its only major operation that was garnering a profit was the heavy trucks. Everything else, including the vaunted Mercedes-Benz cars, was losing money. Chrysler was riding high in 1998, flush with cash from strong sales of the minivans, LH large sedans, JA midsizers, and Dodge Ram trucks; and from newly-implemented manufacturing efficiencies. Daimler waved “incentives” in front of key Chrysler execs and once they got the company, robbed it of cash. The innovative team at Chrysler which had brought forth so many new cars in such a short time, and which was working on the soon-to-be wildly successful PT Cruiser (which Daimler wanted to kill), fled DaimlerChrysler in just a few years. Daimler left Chrysler adrift intellectually, with a moribund product line, and short on resources, saddling new owners…who didn’t feel like spending much money either…with the remains. Even the highly-praised 2005 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum/Charger featured infamous Daimler cheap interiors…Fiat upgraded them, as well as the Avenger/Sebring’s, after buying Chrysler out of Daimler-induced bankruptcy.
As for Daimler being a “trainwreck…” Daimler had a railroad equipment manufacturing subsidiary. It was made up of its own rail division, and formerly successful European rail equipment manufacturers which had previously merged to become ABB…ASEA Brown-Boveri. Daimler merged its rail operations with ABB, becoming ADtranz (ABB-DaimlerTransportation) with an agreement to purchase ABB’s share on demand. Daimler did so, but once in control, failed in running the company, losing money for years and finally showing a one-year profit only by numerous shady deals, manipulations and tax write-offs. Daimler finally sold ADTranz to the Canadian company Bombardier for a bargain price.
As an automotive enthusiast and not an automotive engineer, it continues to amaze me when platforms such as this one enter the market with a number of flaws, yet no amount of improvements nor refinements seem to be able to turn them into competitive offerings. As stated, none of the JS derivatives were particularly noteworthy.
If you simply look at the numbers, you’d say there’s nothing substantially different from the class leaders from a dimensional or performance standpoint. Yet the reality of the product paints a vastly different picture. It leads me to believe that the platform development of a vehicle is like a building’s foundation; you can skimp, but no amount of plaster can hide the cracks that eventually show through.
It’s like the car was developed in a vacuum. They just made a car for the market segment and said ‘good enough’. Pardon me, but that’s NOT good enough. Fancy a new model coming seventh out of seven in a comparo! With a new platform, if you can’t produce a product which is at least as good as the competition you’re in the wrong business.
Icky. 2008 wasn’t a great year for a lot of manufacturers. The Camry and Accord of the same year felt cheaper than expected. The Avenger takes Recession-era cost cutting to an entirely different level though.
I don’t even think the styling elevates the car. The kicked-up contour above the rear fender trying to evoke a rear-wheel drive muscle car is poorly done, the black plastic cladding that takes up half the rear window has no functional or aesthetic purpose, and every body panel just looks clunky.
But…if you got one cheap and it proved to be reliable then it has the important bases covered. Were these reliable?
Not too bad aside from a smattering of typical Chrysler electrical issues, stemming primarily from their TIPM box which is the bane of all ChryCo vehicles of the 2007-2016ish era, probably a weak-ish front end in terms of balljoints, also an endemic Chrysler issue it seems.
The avenger wasn’t the only Chrysler product to come with a loathsome interior during this time period. They were universally horrible until they got updates. Gm had some horrible interiors during this time as well. I throw out better plastics every time I use up a container of detergent.
Dad wanted a new car in 2011 after looking for a couple of years and the Accord was ok, the Camry was ok, he didn’t like the sonata, the caliber deserved every obliquoy thrown at it, and the avenger was considerably less expensive than a Camry or Accord and adequate. The interior refresh made it . . . Well, it wasn’t NICE but it was better, and did I mention it was considerably less expensive? He ended up spending the extra money and getting a charger which he really likes.
The basic platform is reliable but these things were hertz specials and then went to the credit challenged at a new car dealers used lot and then on to the buy here pay here place so I’d be leery more of the typical owner than the car itself.
Everything from the Chrysler side of “the merger of equals” DaimlerChrysler had these trash interiors from the mid-2000s on, as the overlords in Stuttgart decreed the Chrysler side’s interior budgets were to be slashed by 40%. See, Daimler needed the cash for the Daimler side of the business, so Chrysler got sucked dry and discarded.
I recall getting a 2011 or so as a rental on a business trip. The next day and to my surprise I was asked to haul 4 other guys and myself all the way to downtown Ottawa (from Kanata). I always delight in being behind the wheel but that day what you spoke about with the high beltline really struck home. It felt cramped dimensionally as well as through the sightlines. Hey I had the driver’s seat all to myself and I still felt cramped. With three guys across the back I could barely see anything through the rear view mirror or to change lanes. Nobody complained however, I’m sure they were glad to get out to be able to stretch their legs after the longest 45 minute driver ever.
These cars always seemed to me to be a little smaller Charger, but I never saw them as Accord sized, visually. Buyers must have gotten that twinge of disappointment when they came to that realization.
A young friend owned one of these (a 2010-ish), and it was a complete disaster for him, taking multiple rides on a flatbed. The one thing I recall was that the plastic inner fender broke away leaving the battery exposed to road spray in front of the driver side front wheel. Simply brilliant engineering, that.
I suppose I could be convinced to live with one of the later high spec 3.6 cars, but it would have to be completely presentable and functional and come in at around $2500 in order to get my attention. Unless a 30 year old M body for a similar condition and price was available.
I am the young friend JP mentioned (long-time listener, first-time caller here, hi there), and yes, the car was a disaster. I can vouch for the poor quality -inside and out- that these cars brought to the table.
I actually had experience with two 2008s- an SXT of my sister’s (bought used with about 37k on the odometer) and mine, a regular SE bought used in 2011 with about 77k, a former fleet mobile. Though my outlook was initially very optimistic, I learned quickly how terrible both cars were.
Why’d I get it? The Avenger was my first big-boy car purchase at 21 (aside from a 1993 Miata NA) and I thought it looked cool.
The best part about having two of them in the family was that it let us track all the issues (both annoying and major) my sister would have in about 40,000 miles. Sometimes this strategy didn’t work- we both experienced multiple instances of master power window switch failure at the same time. Ultimately, it didn’t matter much for her in the long run. Her Avenger was totaled after about a year of ownership by a mud-coated Wrangler. turning across a state highway.
Mine soldiered on in various state of disrepair for another four years. Favorite stories? The wheel-well cover/inner fender breaking off that JP mentioned was great. By that point, the car was still too new to source cheap replacements from a junkyard, so I eventually fashioned a fix out of zip ties and a floor mat to shield the battery from the road spray. Once, after what I thought had been a sedate, 350-mile trip to northern Michigan, I stopped at a gas station only to realize the entire front bumper cover had disconnected from the car and sat hanging like a kid’s loose tooth (again, I deployed the zip ties). Thankfully it hadn’t been hanging low enough to drag across two states’ worth of pavement.
Eventually, the PCM (at the time, much more expensive than now to replace) failed, two weeks after I replaced the alternator, battery, and starter. A month later I broke a valve in a construction zone on one of Indiana’s busiest highways and got stranded. A 45-mile tow back to my mechanic confirmed the car was done and we pushed it home from there.
At the end of the month, I paid it off, and eventually sold it for $500 on Craigslist to a guy who wanted to use its front end to fix his own Avenger that had been in a collision. As soon as he handed the cash over, it impaled itself on his tow dolly, ripping off the bumper one last time.
To this day, I’ve never seen a 2008-10 Avenger in which the triangular piece of trim that hides the bolts to the driver’s side mirror lines up properly.
Anyway, I probably wouldn’t get another one.
“Anyway, I probably wouldn’t get another one.”
I nominate TC for droll understatement of the year. And I had forgotten that your sister had one too. That collision was probably the best way to dispose of one of these.
Given the lack of any redeeming quality, I’m surprised at how many of these I see on the roads.
In my opinion, new (or former rental) Avengers are the automotive version of poorly-built and style-less new townhouses. Even unknowledgeable people can see these are not built to withstand time well, the materials are cheap, and the appearance is too uninspired to even be called utilitarian. But still, people buy them.
Why? A lot of people just want a new(ish) house they can live in for a few years and then move on. Same thing with cars, I suppose. The appeal of something new is very strong, even if its faults are plainly obvious. And cheap sells, to a certain extent. But from a long-range standpoint, selling cars like this is catastrophic to a brand’s future prospects. Definitely worthy of Deadly Sin status.
Having just taken a quick trip across the parking to McDonald’s for a SuperSize coke, I saw two Avengers and one similar vintage 200 on my journey.
I agree with what you say. I would also add there are a number of people who bought these based upon price and nothing else, because a car is a car, they all do the same thing, and why pay more for something that does what the cheaper one does??? That is simply for illustration; few of us around here likely think that way.
When car shopping in 2014 there was a car event at the local mall where all the dealers had their entire inventories on hand. The Dodge dealer had about 30 new Avengers there in various colors but all were priced at around $18k although he had one or two that were in the $17k range. He was wanted to deal badly. The one I sat in wreaked of being mediocre at best; while I have an irrational soft spot for Dodge, I just couldn’t generate any enthusiasm for these.
The way those cheap buildings look after a few years – that is how the most wrung-out Avengers look now. Like this one I saw last fall in a gas station. It is pretty bad when you drive around hoping that your battery doesn’t fall out in a hard right turn.
That’s definitely the way most Avengers/200s seem to end up looking like in a fantastically short amount of time with the bad-credit crowd in Indy it seems. The most fitting moment was last year a tinted out Avenger t-boned a beat up Journey at 52nd and Keystone (for those that know that part of Indianapolis).
Looks like a Terminator V.1 LOL.
On one hand I’d never be able to drive a car like this for a day without going to the nearest u pull it salvage yard and throwing on a used $50 bumper cover that may or may not match… on the other hand I see the utilitarian genius of driving around like this due to the asinine battery location.
The new 2011 interior:
I actually think these looked a little better than the original LX Charger the styling was derived from, both cars looked stubby for their actual sizes with the high haunches but t seems somehow more fitting in this scale and the lights look better(even back then I had enough with the angry squinty eyes!).
That’s the best I can say though, I drove a pre-update rental on a family vacation and it honestly felt like a plastic toy analogous to a power wheels Jeep, right down to the scaled down styling, only it was less smooth running or fun to drive. It’s hard for me to cope with the fact that they are midsized and BIGGER outside than a Camry. The interior is pretty tight, especially in back, and even in person right next to one I’d say it was a compact if I didn’t have a tape measure handy.
These cars are so craptastic. My ex has a red one, can’t remember what year but it is one of the early ones before the update. She has only had it for about 4 years and it has been a total headache from day one. The clearcoat has literally disintegrated due to the Texas heat and not being washed regularly, it has had constant electrical problems, constant suspension problems, the plastic interior creaks and rattles, the check engine light is always on, and it’s thirsty but not even that fast or sporty. One problem that I remember her having with it in particular is a recurring issue with the gauge cluster. It will just die at random moments and then come back to life, and then die again. And when that happens it makes a constant dinging noise and the lights will flicker. Really irritating and potentially dangerous. Just a total POS. In it’s defense though, I like the distinctly American looks but that’s the only positive thing I can say about it.
Back in the day, a family of Brits, complete with two full size sons, ventured to the USA for a road trip kind of holiday, up and down the West Coast . At the car rental counter, we actually turned down other popular models, for a Dodge Avenger – because we wanted a ‘real American car’ . Mmmm … I guess, we did get one ! Nevertheless, a great holiday, in all other respects.
I think a successfully avoided these but do recall a Sebring rental from 2005 or so that was horrible even in comparison to our 95 Escort
Rent-A-Turd, too familiar with these.
From what I understand, the 2008-2010 version was a result of the Daimler overlords cost-cutting the crap out of the Chrysler products.
In 2009 or so, I flew into Tampa on a business trip, arriving several hours late at about 11 pm. Out on the National lot, there were exactly three cars to choose from: A Nissan Versa and my choice of two Avengers, one black and the other red. I rejected the Versa, knowing it was the very bottom of the rental car barrel, and went with the red Avenger in the hopes it would remain cooler than the black one in the summer Florida heat. Easily one of the worst rental cars I’ve ever rented…plasticky interior prone to rattles, the droning powertrain desperately needing another gear, and very uncomfortable seats covered with itchy fabric, a real minus, as we would be spending hours in that car. Beyond those intrinsic weaknesses, the car was in poor condition, with two flatspotted tires, numerous dents, and a pervasive ashtray smell. Two other problems made this rental very memorable: hard acceleration caused the digital instrument panel to go dark (it would flicker on again once I reached cruising speed) and the gas flap could not be opened at all, causing me to return the car to the airport a day later, coasting in on fumes. I watched the lot attendant trying to pry open the flap with a screwdriver as I drove off in a brand new Camry with only 500 miles on it.
Sounds like someone just before you had themselves some fun and beat the living unholy hell out of the wretched miserable thing. I can’t imagine the unspeakable abuse they heaped on it but it must have been spectacular from what you’re describing.
Dodge Avenger: The only car whose episode of Regular Car Reviews was deemed “too vulgar for this earth” even by its creators.
We had one of these to get us home from Denver across the wind-blasted tundra of Nebraska when the 2014 polar vortex cancelled our return flight. As a functioning, heated vehicle, it did its job. That’s about the nicest thing I can say about the Avenger.
“As a functioning, heated vehicle it did it’s job.” Sometimes that is the difference between living to bitch about hard plastics and freezing to death. 0 to 60, or Car of the Year don’t matter much at times like this. Just saying.
This car honestly hasn’t blipped on my radar in years but everything you say is very true of it. A truly disappointing midsize car.
These also have the distinction of being some of the newest cars turned in for Cash For Clunkers. The terrible mileage meant they qualified, and the low resale value meant that the $4500 the government was offering was more than what some dealers were offering as trade-in value. Not bad for a car that was barely a year old at the time.
It says something that they posted bad enough official MPG numbers to qualify. (Hopefully only V6s? Surely fours were above the threshold?)
But then, the Caliber couldn’t break the 30 mpg barrier even with the base 2.0/manual. That was a real waste, the Caliber was a great concept and exactly where the market was headed, but Daimler’s unrelenting cheapness meant the execution was terrible.
I remember my dad picking me up in one of these when my moms sonata was at the dealer for some reason, which happened a lot.
Oh those. Believe it or not, they were sold here in Austria…
I do believe that. Thanks for reminding me, I’d forgotten to link the following at the end of the article:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/dodge-goes-global-taking-a-plastic-fork-to-a-knife-fight/
Thanks. Another thing we have M-B to “thank” for. A company not intent on creaming off Chrysler would have realized it had something on its hand which, with a bit of thought and development, could have represented a value brand on its hands, just as VW (with Skoda) and Renault (with Dacia) did and reaped long term profits. The Neon in its first iteration was in fact selling in Europe and other markets. Not spectacularly so, but it was present on the market and accepted by it. The second one could have improved on this had it hit the ground running with no reliability issues and proper back up from M-B.
Back in 2009 I desperately wanted an Avenger to replace my first car (a 96 camry that sucked in floodwater and went “klunk”) but couldn’t quite afford it and ended up with a Lancer instead. That car was fantastic, with good performance and amazing fuel economy, and served faithfully until I sold it at the end of 2017. With an extra 400cc in the same basic engine, on the same platform, I probably would have been very happy with the Dodge, assuming the electrics were up to scratch.
Now with 2 young kids I would love a Journey as the shape is just right for us (so many SUVs have no rear overhang and consequently tiny boots) but they have a terrible reputation for reliability in Australia.
These boxes are fading away in BHPH-land.* With Big 3 dropping cars, what will take their place as a ‘cheap used car’? What CUV’s will be BHPH fodder? [If not already?]
*Actually “out of style” with used car buyers.
Every Chrysler that was marketed in the UK was a joke and none lasted more than couple of years. Their 2nd-hand value is zilch. Don’t they look at what the opposition is offering?
Daimler ‘stole’ Chrysler’s money. It’s called repatriating the profits from the subsidiary company. It’s what Ford and GM have been doing to their European subsidiaries for ever. Welcome to client status. You better get used to it, end of empire is a difficult time, we know.