(first posted 4/16/2015) As of 2014, it has been statistically proven that SUVs and CUVs are more popular than sedans, making them the most popular type of vehicle in the United States. With that in mind, it’s surprising that a mainstream brand like Chrysler does not currently sell an SUV or CUV under its own label. Of course, a Chrysler salesman would gladly direct you across the showroom, where you’ll find the Dodge Durango, Dodge Journey, and the whole Jeep lineup.
The automaker has the mid-size luxury-SUV segment well-covered with the top-line Grand Cherokee Overland Summit. And while the Grand Cherokee is easily the most luxurious vehicle next to the 300 that Fiat-Chrysler Group produces (some would argue even more so than the 300), it still seems odd that Chrysler would not tap into the profitable SUV/CUV market with a semi-luxurious entry in any size class.
Well, the fact of the matter is that Chrysler did venture into this segment–twice. Taking an unusual route, Chrysler released a car-based crossover first, the 2004 Chrysler Pacifica. The first new Chrysler released under the Daimler-Benz partnership, the Pacifica was built using a number of Mercedes-derived components and technologies. While this would have appeared to be a positive thing, it made the Pacifica more expensive to produce, which translated to unusually high sticker prices for a Chrysler.
To make matters worse, the Pacifica was a heavily flawed vehicle. Despite its large exterior dimensions, interior space was tight, and its hefty bulk resulted in poor fuel economy. Furthermore, the Pacifica suffered from poor interior materials and build quality, and an unrefined drivetrain unworthy of its price tag. The vehicle was also plagued by numerous reliability issues related to engine, transmission, electrical and interior components, thus essentially sealing its fate. Sales naturally never lived up to expectations, and the Pacifica was dropped in 2008, with no successor.
In rather backward order, Chrysler would release a traditional truck-based, body-on-frame SUV in 2007, just as gas was nearing $4.00/gallon in many parts of the country and as car-based CUVs were becoming ever-popular. Taking a move right out of Lee Iacocca’s playbook, Chrysler took a less expensive Dodge (the Durango), tacked on a bunch of gingerbread, and then sold it as a Chrysler for more money.
While there were no vinyl roofs and wire wheels, this Chrysler SUV’s styling “enhancements” surely would have made Lido proud. We’ll get to them shortly, but I first must address Chrysler’s odd choice of name when it came to this vehicle.
Rather than going for the Full Iacocca™, and naming this SUV some variation of either New Yorker or LeBaron, Chrysler went back to the days just prior to Lido’s arrival, and recycled the name “Aspen”. Now as most of you recall, the Dodge Aspen and its Plymouth Volare twin were among the most disastrous vehicles the company ever produced, with their numerous quality issues and recalls playing a huge role in Chrysler’s near death in 1979. Oh the irony in déjà vu.
Using the Dodge Durango as a starting point, Chrysler piled on the brightwork, with “chrome” mirrors, door handles, window trim, bodyside moldings and bumper caps. A large chrome grille replaced Dodge’s crosshairs and headlights received a rounded bottom similar to that on other Chryslers. As with other Chryslers in the late ‘00s, the Aspen was treated to the in-vogue Crossfire-inspired grooved hood.
Around back, more conventional rectangular units that looked like they came off an early-90’s Voyager replaced the Durango’s taillights. And of course, upsized chrome wheels were a given. Now truth be told, the Aspen didn’t look all that atrocious exterior-wise. Its styling enhancements greatly reduced the Durango’s somewhat toy-truck styling, and its chrome was no more over-applied than on other large upscale SUVs. Unfortunately, the same couldn’t be said for the interior.
Climbing up into an Aspen revealed the Durango’s abysmal sea of hard grainy plastic that was bad, even for a Chrysler of this period. Wide panel gaps and numerous exposed screws went without saying. The Aspen’s imitation bird’s eye maple trim, silver plastic trim, and analogue clock “upgrades” did zero favors in creating a more premium environment, as they only highlighted how cheap everything was. At least in the Durango, it was easier to be numbed, as all plastics were the same monotonous color.
Fake wood accents may have been to Lido’s liking, but they looked even worse here than in his ’80s K-cars. If it was any solace, the Aspen’s floor console was, for whatever reason, off-centered with the center stack, much like that of the K-cars.
While Chrysler’s status as a prestigious brand has steadily declined over the past half-century, even today it still has an ever-slight upscale aura, at least when compared to Dodge. In its press release, Chrysler Group Senior VP of Brand Marketing, George Murphy said, “The all-new 2007 Chrysler Aspen offers customers an elegant and sophisticated premium SUV for thousands less than luxury-priced competitors.” The words, “elegant”, “sophisticated”, and “premium” may have been a tad strong to describe the Aspen, but its base price did indeed start only around $31,000 in its inaugural year.
Now of course, for $31,000 you got an Aspen with cloth seats, manual, single-zone HVAC, and rear-wheel drive. Adding options like leather, automatic climate control, four-wheel drive, power passenger’s seat, moonroof, heated seats, navigation system, rear entertainment system, power tailgate, and reverse-sensing system pushed the Aspen’s price north of 40 grand. Most Aspens came equipped as such, so for all intents and purposes, this was a $40,000 vehicle with interior materials barely befitting a $15,000 compact.
If there was one truly bright spot about the Chrysler Aspen (not including its acres of exterior chrome), it was the car’s available 5.7L Hemi V8 (a 4.7L V8 was standard). Offering 335 horsepower and 370 lb.-ft. of torque, the Hemi was capable of propelling the 5,500-lb. SUV to 60 miles per hour in reported 7.1 seconds. It also allowed the Aspen to have a best-in-class towing capacity of nearly 9,000 lbs. All that power did come at a cost, however, as EPA-estimated fuel economy was only 15 mpg in mixed driving.
It should be noted that the Aspen and Durango were Chrysler’s first hybrid vehicles. Using the same two-mode system found in Tahoe/Yukon hybrids, the electric motor was paired with the 5.7L Hemi, producing fuel economy numbers of 20 city and 22 highway. It should also be noted the the very first Chrysler Aspen Hybrid went to Lee Iacocca himself. Unfortunately, not many others got the chance to own a hybrid Mopar SUV, as in October 2008, only two months after they went into production and less than one month after they hit showrooms, Chrysler announced it would be closing the Newark, Delaware plant which produced the Aspen/Durango, and that it would be discontinuing both vehicles. Aspen/Durango production ended in December 2008, with just under 65,000 Aspens produced over three years.
This was at the height of the Great Recession and 2007-2008 financial crisis in the United States, and thanks to rising fuel costs, slumping sales and a number of other factors, Chrysler was once again looking death in the eye. On April 30, 2009, the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The subsequent federal government bailout, growing interest and eventual control by Fiat, and reorganization strategy transformed Chrysler into a leaner, better focused, and more efficient corporation. Although its products have greatly improved in the years since, the strategy of doing away with overlapping models has left the Chrysler brand especially thinly spread, with only three vehicles as of 2015.
Though there has been talk of a Chrysler-branded luxury CUV for the past several years, it appears that Dodge will get a CUV instead, as the company is apparently discontinuing the Grand Caravan and investing in an all-new Town & Country minivan. While the question of a future Chrysler CUV is still up in the air, it’s safe to say that a traditional body-on-frame SUV is not in Chrysler’s future, leaving the Aspen as the brand’s sole foray in this field. Although it has been less than a decade, even just a couple of years later few people remember the ill-timed, ill-named, ill-trimmed, and ill-fated Aspen, Chrysler’s only SUV.
Photographed: Disney’s Hollywood Studios, Lake Buena Vista, FL – April 2015
Within the past 24-hours, I spotted an Aspen parked near me while shopping. I realized that I rarely see one, and had the thought that should I want or need an SUV, that is most likely what I would get. I don’t like to have a vehicle just like everybody else, so that would work for me. And, it has some luxury touches which I would appreciate. I definitely like the light-colored interior.
I agree. As a proud owner of one, I like it more and more everyday. The level of comfort, features, power. It’s hard to find many things together in one vehicle, like: hemi engine, AWD/4WD combined, very confortable 7 seats, 3 zone climate control, rear entertainment system, alpine sound system with hard drive, power liftgate, remote start, navigation, rear parking sensors, 9,000 lb towing capacity, sunroof and many other features!!!
I can understand that with Chrysler being smaller than Ford or GM it doesn’t have a lot of options when it comes to picking an available platform for new products, but instead of having a GOOD long-range product strategy, Chrysler (the brand, not the company) hasn’t done much more than see a model at Dodge doing well and deciding to milk it for higher profit with a Chrysler version.
Chrysler dealers sell Dodges and Jeeps, so what is/was the point of a Chrysler SUV? I’m not crazy about the Pacifica, but it was original and Mercedes (ironically) seems to make the idea work with the “R-class”. As a CUV, the Pacifica makes more sense for Chrysler (the brand, not the company) but was poorly built and too heavy for it’s size.
This company is repeating the same muddled steps that killed the Plymouth brand.
At least in the U.S., the R-Class didn’t do much better than the Pacifica. It was obviously better-built and had a higher-quality interior, but I don’t think sales were anything near the M-Class.
Even with Dodge and Jeep SUV/CUVs, I think that there is room in Chrysler’s lineup for a compact luxury CUV, to primarily compete with the Lincoln MKC, as well as the Lexus NX, Audi Q5, and BMW X3 to some extent. It’s one of the hottest segments right now, and Chrysler doesn’t have an entry in it. The same Alfa platform that underpins the Dart/200/Cherokee could be used, so long as the car looks different enough from the Cherokee.
Except Chrysler’s no longer even pretending to be a sort of slightly-upscale or near luxury brand. It’s the mainstream brand—the relationship between Chrysler and Dodge is currently far closer to something like the relationship between Hyundai and Kia than anything else. I’m pretty sure Alfa’s going to be coming out with a compact luxury CUV soon and Jeep has good brand equity in this segment—I’m not sure if there’s a lot of room between them.
The ultra rare R63 AMG model is possibly the ultimate sleeper…what a cool vehicle.
I think the R-Class was a poor seller worldwide
As a former 2005 Pacifica owner, mine was a wonderful car with tons of interior space. Drove 225,000 trouble free miles before replacing it. If Chrysler still made the Pacifica when we replaced it we would have bought another one. Also I have to say that to my eye, the Aspen was a good looking vehicle (except for the hideous hood) and upgraded the Durango as much as the Navigator for the Expedition or the Escalade did for the Tahoe/Suburban.
“I can understand that with Chrysler being smaller than Ford or GM it doesn’t have a lot of options when it comes to picking an available platform for new products, ”
well, that was kind of the whole point of tying up with another automaker. Unfortunately Daimler was too worried about protecting the “prestige” of the Mercedes-Benz brand to let Chrysler Group use anything of any significance. thus they forced Chrysler into disastrous corner-cutting and relegating their vehicles to cheap crap.
It wasn’t just Daimler trying to protect the prestige line. Daimler was clueless when it came to volume production at lower price points. I recall a story where Daimler execs demanded the use of a Mercedes floor pan stamping (to save money) even though it required multiple expensive changes to other components in order to accommodate the M-B stamping. Their attempt to save money actually cost much more than it saved. Then at the end when the whole project has gone horribly over budget, money was relentlessly squeezed out of the interiors which, of course, turned off customers.
Not saying that Chrysler didn’t have it’s problems before the D-B tieup, but Daimler management was a complete and utter disaster that took the most profitable car company in the world and turned it into a giant slug that had to be sold at a huge loss.
they did the same as BMW did to Rover. The intention all along was to increase MB sales at the expense of mopar market share and then ditch/close chrysler imho.
I wonder that Mopar spent so much money on Hemi engine and torsion bar suspension they only way they could make money was to reduce build quality. Nothing they have produce from 1957 on smacks of quality. Same for the European wing. Even today PSA cars are known for cheap build and electrical gremlins. Mopars kiss of death touched Mercedes Benz with the 210 series E Class on.
I see a couple of Aspens around Toledo, one the same color as the one in the article. IMHO, the Aspen, on the outside, even with all the chrome stuff, which I always disliked, looked 10 times better than the Durango, which was a decent looking vehicle in it’s previous generation, but became ugly as hell with the weird and awkward front and rear ends. Inside, give me the Durango any day, I would hate to see all that fake wood, and the light interior color is a major turn off. Just make mine black with more black, and I’m ok, no matter how garbage canlike the plastic is.
If you want a plastichrome overdose, look at non-fleet F-250s of late.
One •needs• exposed screws with makes like Chrysler.
I agree the Aspen looks way better than the Durango it was derived from, though it is pretty bland.
I really like how this looks, and I think this SUV is going to be on my short list of interesting used cars to look into when I get back to the States this year.
To some degree, I believe that’s true. I believe it depends on what you intend to use the vehicle for. If you have a family of 7 people, you might want a “CUV”. If you have a business to run and you need something rugged enough for off-road use, you might want/need an SUV. Stylistically speaking, I find the Dodge Durango to be the most attractive, better looking than the Chrysler Aspen or the current Fiat based vehicles. And way better looking than the current Jeep Cherokee. If I were to give Chrysler one fault, it’s that none of the SUVs or CUVs were ever available with a turbo diesel engine. With diesel fuel becoming “cleaner” and diesel engines generally becoming quieter than diesels of old, what’s stopping car makers from offering them here in the USA or Canada? That doesn’t make sense. Diesel may not be for everyone. No matter what you may say in favour of diesel engines, there will still be people who wouldn’t buy one if it were the only engine option, I’m sure there are people who have been demanding an American market diesel engine, but were disappointed to find their demands have not been met. Or in worst cases, the diesel engines already offered by Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen weren’t to their standards. They were either too small for needs, didn’t provide the power and torque for their needs, or simply unreliable.
Jeep does currently offer the Grand Cherokee with a 3.0L V6 Diesel in the U.S. – not that I’ve seen any. I think people’s association with diesel in the U.S. is still the black smoke emitting trucks. They may get better gas mileage, but diesel fuel is still more expensive the regular unleaded and even these newer “clean diesel” cars still emit high levels of nitrogen oxides.
Here in SoCal, diesel is quite a bit cheaper than gasoline right now. I don’t know if it’s a tax effect, or just that they gouge us on gasoline (I suspect the latter).
I know CA has higher gas taxes than AZ, but there are likely other variables involved which could affect supply/demand, like refinery capacity, how much is exported overseas (the US exports a lot), regional fuel formulations (e.g. ethanol content), etc. I was told by a Western Distributing driver at Costco that in AZ at least, fuel formulation varies by local jurisdiction!
I’m beginning to suspect one has to be an industry specialist to understand it all. No wonder people think conspiracies are afoot.
I think the black smoke can be reduced by some pedal-to-the-metal running. Same goes for gasoline vehicles with carbon buildup.
That Diesel is way more expensive (up to 60¢/gal where I live) is the reason I don’t even consider it. This is also the reason I’ll never buy a car that requires 91 octane, it’s a perpetual cost penalty (unless I can be convinced there’s a compensating gain in fuel economy).
I remember reading (from a British source, oddly enough) that the interiors of Daimler-era Chryslers were deliberately cheapened out under orders from Stuttgart so they wouldn’t compete with Mercedes in export markets. Also that private-equity Cerberus had bought Chrysler with the intent to asset-strip it and dump it but a) found that it had already been thoroughly stripped of assets by Daimler, and b) were left holding the bag when the economy tanked.
You mean in the same sort of way that BMW ensured that its Rover-subsidiary’s vehicles had to be less able than the BMWs they shared sector space, so that the whole idea of trading up to a Rover (still conceivable in the early 90s) was kicked into touch? Those crazy Germans!
That German acquisition foolishness makes me think they never heard Dave Barry’s gag about New Coke: You have a killer business formula with huge customer credibility you’ve made tons of money from over the years, so what do you do? Change it!
I wonder if it was some kind of collectomania, with brands, not Pokemon. Got to catch them all!
Could be, or maybe it was ego. Some leaders think they have to prove themselves by doing something new, even if it’s actually stupid.
Example: “I had a compelling desire, maybe out of honor for the old gentleman, maybe out of sheer cussedness, to prove to the world that I could excel in the same way that [Dad] did.” This was Thos. Watson Jr.’s motivation for, among other things, gambling $5 billion on the IBM System/360.
Kind of like what happened to Lincoln compared with Jaguar in the Jac Nasser/PAG days at Ford. Jaguar was the premium brand, so Lincoln was left to be the near-luxury brand, with cheaper interiors, less power and torque, etc. (compare LS to S-Type to see this best). Ford is still trying to dig Lincoln out from that brand positioning.
True, the 300 was a previous generation E class under neath it’s “Gangster/ mock Bentley ” exterior. If the interior quality was as good as an E Class why buy an E class?.
The aspen looks better than the dodge think. And the wood looks nice too better in the inside. Chrysler should make a new aspen give it a new name and if they need help ask fiat and what you have is a world suv.
I had forgotten about these already. I actually kind of liked the Pacifica, and the early ones (before they decontented the interiors) were not too bad. But the only things these had going for them was that they were not as offensively ugly as the Durango.
And of all of the names in Chrysler’s history, why on earth pick Aspen? Good riddence, Daimler!
Certain years of the Pacifica also had terminal front subframe rust due to a manufacturing defect. There was a time when Chrysler was fixing it under warranty if you lived in the rust belt, but if you didn’t and still had the problem, Chrysler wouldn’t do anything for you. That happened to a co-worker of mine and cured him of the desire to ever do business with them again.
In 2007, my aunt and uncle purchased a pre-owned 2004 Pacifica Touring. They were loyal Mopar owners in the 1990s/2000s, and loved that Pacifica, seeing past all of its faults. I rode in it a good number of times in the short period they owned it (my older cousin crashed and totaled it about 2 years later).
The first and second row (theirs had second row buckets with center console) were very comfortable, but the vinyl-upholstered 3rd row was cramped, even for someone small like me. The interior was full of hard, cheap-looking plastics, and the leather wasn’t all that nice either. At least the fake wood and silver trim was reasonably attractive.
The early Pacificas looked pretty nice from the front, but around back got far less flattering. The intent with the Pacifica was good, but the final product just didn’t fit the build for what customers were looking for.
I agree that the Aspen was better looking than that model Durango. It was hard for me to believe they were related. The one that came after, though, I really like the look of, even though it looks (because it is) a tad cheap.
I thought the Pacifica was one of the better Chrysler efforts. I didn’t base that opinion on any real data, only the appearance of quality and style.
It looked like they were trying, is what I mean to say.
Could have been worse. They could have called it an Airflow.
This was a pointless waste of time and resources that Chrysler did not have to create this. Everybody knew this was simply a tarted up Durango and unlike GM which can sell a tarted up Suburban as the Escalade and have folks waiting out the door and around the corner to buy them, Mother Mopar does not have any brand cachet anymore so nobody bought them.
This whole story reminds me why I’m an ex-Mopar homer.
No palm trees, but there is a Mass. connection. Old school Congressman Stephen Lynch got in mild trouble for buying new wheels on someone else’s dime, in the late aughts. I don’t remember the details except that his new swagmobile was one of these. Stay classy, Southie? Gov. Patrick at least went for a Caddy, which was of course called the “Sedan Deval.”
My nickname for that man is Deval DeVille. And Stephen Lynch owning an Aspen? He’s more of a Grand Marquis kind of guy, known affectionately in these parts as the Irish Cadillac.
I’ve always had trouble understanding why they do well with some types of SUV/CUV but not others. While it’s not the juggernaut it once was, the Grand Cherokee is very competitive in its segment. And the Cherokee/Cherokee classic was successful for years and years, even well past its sell-by date. The original Durango did well for those who wanted a V8-powered SUV without going full Tahoe. So why has Jeep itself, to say nothing of parent Chrysler and sibling Dodge, been unable to take the success of the larger vehicles and translate it to a smaller one? The Liberty was never able to follow in the Cherokee’s footsteps, the Patriot only seems to have ever been bought by fleets, and the Compass was an unmitigated disaster that never should have been called Jeep in the first place. The Durango got uglified for its second generation (though the current one at least is back to looking good) and the Aspen’s shortcomings are well noted here. We’re not even mentioning the poor Journey which was simply an uninspired effort all around.
Maybe they’ve changed their ways–the new Renegade at least *looks* like a Jeep, though the jury’s still out on whether it can function like one. I can only assume Chrysler or Dodge, maybe both, will get something on the same platform?
Although there are a fair number of both the Pacifica and Aspen in my area, I most remember (but can’t remember for which car) the Celine Dion TV commercials for Chrysler at the time.
But if they didn’t leave an identity as to what was being advertised, what use were they, other than to underline Daimler’s failure to itself, and how the Germans robbed and ruined a profitable and rising American car company?
What parts did the Pacifica get from Mercedes? I always thought of the Pacifica as simply being a re-shaped Town & Country.
I think it may be more smaller bits like electronics and controls. My Challenger still has the old Mercedes cruise control stalk – they went back to steering wheel buttons the following year.
The overall look of these just works better than the contemporary Durango with its swollen botox-lipped look. What it looks like is that the retro Power Box concept (inspired by the Power Wagon concept of 2000) was to be the Durango, but either chickened out or more likely that look was regulated into the half baked mutant we got. Some vestiges of the PB’s retro flat fendered look are trying to get out but what COULD have been the coolest looking SUV on the road was bludgeoned into mediocrity at some point. The Aspen’s conventional look is just better executed, and from the comments above Im not alone in my thinking.
I’m guessing they tried to make the Aspen look good, but the accountants wouldn’t allow them the budget.
The Aspen does look good if a little mainstream. Its the Durango that got beat with the ugly stick. It appears caught between the flat fendered look of the concept and a conventional front clip with integrated hood/fenders.
Oh and I might get ridiculed for this, but I actually liked the straked hoods that Chrysler was doing at the time. I thought it added a little something. Too bad it never got onto the PT Cruiser or the 300C which are some of the more high profile vehicles Chrysler has put out in some time.
Just another SUV in a crowded market. Couldn`t Chrysler come up with a better name than Aspen? At least its better than Volare, but that ain`t saying too much.
Maybe they’re counting on most SUV buyers being too young to remember ’70s decadence, and older buyers having amnesia.
As municipalities like mine neglect road maintenance (misdirecting budgets for more sexy projects), SUVs will make more & more sense. Recall the Model T was effectively an off-road vehicle, when few roads were even paved.
What were they thinking bringing back that nameplate? The people who remember the original are far from gone yet! In fact, they were right in the fat part of the demographic who might actually buy one of these abominations.
I’ve never driven an Aspen, but am left with the hope that it HAS to be better than the Pacifica. I got stuck with a Pacifica for one day when my S-10 broke down at work, and the Enterprise across the street from work didn’t have anything else available until the next day.
The Pacifica was easily the worst automobile I’ve driven in the past twenty years. Not terribly comfortable, an interior that can best be described as “upscale-cheap-I’d-be-more-comfortable-in-a-Yugo”, handing that I hadn’t had to deal with since the last 70’s brougham I’d driven (no, that is not damming with faint praise, it’s finding a way around the site’s language censor routine), and it cost me a fortune in gas for the 24 hours I had it.
I’ll take the tackiest brougham you can think of before I’d ever consider owning a Pacifica.
Media reports are that Marchionne is going to give Dodge a CUV in the near future, while Chrysler will be the sole nameplate with a much more upmarket (read: expensive) new Town & Country minivan.
But, then, Canada squawked about losing minivan production (the Ram C/V, which was based upon the Grand Caravan, has been replaced by the Promaster City), so the old Dodge Grand Caravan is going to remain in production, at least for the foreseeable future (and essentially unchanged).
Regardless, the next few years will be interesting to see how Chrysler deals with the CUV/minivan markets. One of the biggest factors would seem to be how Marchionne brought the Promaster City (which is just a rebranded Fiat Doblo) into the United States to compete directly with the Ford Transit Connect and Nissan NV200 small, city-sized, cargo-delivery market. Unlike the NV200 (but like the Transit Connect), the Promaster City is available in a wagon version with side windows and rear seating. I would imagine it was hoped that these smaller minivans would fill-in the gap left by the termination of the much-cheaper-than-the-Odyssey-and-Sienna Grand Caravan.
The only problem is there isn’t an extended length version of the Promaster City with a third row of seats (which is available on the Transit Connect). I’m certain this also factored into the decision to keep the old Grand Caravan in production.
The Fiat Doblo Family is a 7-seater.
And Fiat also has the 500L Living, available as a 7-seater.
Yes, I’d like to see the 500L Living here!
Gross!
I can understand the name Aspen. Old Chrysler names like New Yorker and LeBaron have an East Coast waspy urban ring. They wanted something more upscale western for an SUV that would appeal to people who go skiing at places like…Aspen. I guess they could’ve gone with Telluride, but all the others were already taken.
I forgot about those Durangos, god those are ugly. The fenders remind my of the disproportionate tiny arms of a Tyrannosaurus Rex, without ny of the coolness of being a real Dinosaur. Shame too as I thought the first generation Durango was quite attractive for a SUV.
As for the Chrysler it’s definitely better, the interior though is bleh. Birdseye Maple looks great on guitar necks and that’s about it, real or fake it just looks terrible in this.
haha yes – that is a great analogy
As an original owner of a first gen Durango, the second gen Durango / Aspen was a big disappointment. Bigger outside, seemingly more cramped inside, a weird floorpan with some lumps I couldn’t figure out, a battery accessed through the wheel well, and styling on the early second gen Durango that was an ugly caricature of the first gen. Mopar’s largest SUV went from leader to also ran with the second gen.
I agree with others that the Aspen name was an interesting pick. If you were a car guy, you recalled the compact Dodge Aspen that had a dodgy history. But, standing alone, Aspen connotes sports and an upscale environment due to Aspen Colorado. It really is a great name for an upscale SUV. I thought I had read something that FCA has thought about resurrecting the name on another SUV / CUV.
This was clearly during my 2004-2010 zone out/law school/transitional period as I have no recollection of these existing or seeing them, ever. Also had no idea the Durango had been discontinued.
I distinctly remember when these came out and seeing one at the Detroit Auto Show in either 06 or 07. It sticks in my mind specifically because nothing about them made any sense. The name, the 70s styling touches, the minimal differentation from the Dodge, hell… just the purpose/need for this model in the Chrysler line up at all. The Aspen reminded me a lot of the 2005 nose-job GM minivans in that they both simply prompted an enormous “Why?”
I know you guys will probably hate me for this, but I actually really LIKE the Aspen. I don’t know why, but for some reason I just see through all the faults that it has, and I go to the things I like about it. It’s probably my most favorite vehicle, followed by the Enclave and G6 Convertible.
Thank you!! It’s definitely an awesome vehicle for the ones who actually have had the pleasure of drive/own one.
I think Aspen is a great name, and it’s been long enough since the 70’s p.o.s. car to use it again. It fits a fancy SUV much better than a car anyway, in my rarely humble opinion.
At least they didn’t call it a Volare.
When the Pacifica was introduced, I got an invite from my regular sales guy to come for the intro at the dealer. I hadn’t the slightest interest, and didn’t show, but next time I dropped by, he had saved me a pair of sunglasses and a case from the promo. I still have those today, and use them regularly.
The interior plastics on these mid to late aughts Daimler Chryslers are so bad they must be seen in person to be believed. Texturing, graining, coloration, fitment, design, you name it.
The filtered brochure photos can’t even hide it.
This generation of pig-faced Durango rusts conspicuously around here, and we aren’t known for vehicle rust.
For a DaimlerChrysler interior, at least from the pictures it’s fairly attractive. I remember looking at the ugly sebring convertible and thinking, well perhaps on the inside it’s not so ugly. . . NOPE. that wood is very attractive at least from the pictures. Perhaps if people knew about this car and it hadn’t been launched into the teeth of the financial crisis, it would have done better.
If Buick can go all cuv there really should be no reason Chrysler cannot and produce luxurious versions of the jeep suvs/Cuvs. I’m sure there are plenty of people who might like a jeep but would feel silly driving something so butch. At least, that would be a better plan than what they have now which seems to be to wind down the clock on Chrysler and dodge.
I always thought that Mercedes’ only contribution to the Pacifica was the tuning of the rear suspension (it did handle rather well), and perhaps some minor bits and pieces.
I do believe that the Journey directly replaced the Pacifica.
The all-wheel-drive package J Aspen is a remarkable vehicle in my opinion as an owner. Perfect size, very quick, very quiet, agile handling. The 5.7 hemi sounds great at full throttle too. I’ve owned my 2007 for 10 years and put nearly 100,000 miles on. It now has 160,000 and still runs great. I’ve had it in fairly deep snow, off-road rugged enough to scare the family, strapped luggage on the roof to make room for grandma, pulled the boat up a steep slippery boat ramp after the tide went out. Gets 20 miles per gallon highway fully loaded, has a 9000 pound towing capacity, room for seven, durable leather interior, 4 x 8 sheet of plywood fits, picky wife doesn’t complain one bit, Fault can always be found with interior materials on older rides, but the overall capability is what has been important to me and why I don’t plan on getting rid of my Aspen any time soon.