Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Dodge Intrepid



  • roadwarroadwar Posts: 45
    I just realized! We misunderstood what the 300 owner was saying....he didn't put neon under the car....he put a Neon under the car! The extra 130 hp pulling along with his existing 253 would explain the Mustang GT whopping ability. My faith in humanity is restored, but I still can't figure how he got the Neon under there. Do you think if I removed my back seat, I could fit a Neon under my Trep so that I too could have the Mustang whipping capability?????
  • roadwarroadwar Posts: 45
    I can see myself at the traffic light now: "watch it bud, I've got a Neon under this thing!"
  • fastdriverfastdriver Posts: 2,273
    Hey, don't let one person in the 300M topic area discourage you from posting there! Just ignore him. I agree that the group has changed in the 26 months that I've been there, but it shouldn't stop you from asking questions. The LH cars are all the same- same parts, same assembly plant/line, same people building them etc.


    PS Mmmmmm........Neon under the car?? Wonder if that would make my car shift better? LOL.....
  • roadwarroadwar Posts: 45
    "One spare (Neon) transmission under the car is worth two in the bush"
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380

    i've never owned an intrepid with the 2.7l engine, but i had a rental one time that had that engine. i must say the 3.2l feels quite a bit spunkier.

    as for long term durability, as you probably know, the accord has a better track record according to various indices. however, contrary to post# 176 (troll), this latest generation intrepid is much changed from the first generation. just to name a few changes; totally new body, new suspension bits, entirely new engines...etc. anyway, if indeed you got 220k miles out of your accord you are a lucky man. as a local mechanic recently said to me, the cars today just aren't built like they used to be. i'm not talking about precision here but i'm talking about individual parts. things like suspensions and trannies just aren't built as soundly as they used to be, if they were they would be far too heavy and consume too much fuel. have fun and don't sweat the details so much...
  • x1262x1262 Posts: 7
    Comparison Accord to Intrepid

    Accord will cost $184.00 less for fuel yearly based on 15,000 miles 1.46 per gallon 45% hwy 55% city. TheAccord also produces 1.7 tons less annual GHG emissions.

    NHTSA and IIHS rates the Accord as good . Intrepid gets an average / marginal rating.

    TSB Accord 18 Intrepid 26
    Recalls Accord 1 Intrepid 4

    Intrepid 200,000 without major problems, you could think that only if you expect the snow to be green this winter.

    200,000 miles expect to have problems with the electrical, a/c, heater, steering, suspension, motor, transmission, seat, and almost any component you can think of. The Dodge product is not designed for long term reliability.

    I did read in a previous post though that the Intrepid does make a good big load pizza delivery vehicle.
  • x1262x1262 Posts: 7
    Emie good for you to admit the new Intrepids aren't as good as the old ones, now that is really progress. Just how long is the Intrepid transmission designed to function properly one day two days three days etc etc etc????
  • davidudavidu Posts: 40

    Hey, I never thought of it that way- what a difference a capitalized "N" can make!!

    I'm going with the Neon idea- off to the junkyard to find a battered one with a good motor- maybe one of the previous models with the 150 horse motor!!
  • 2000trep2000trep Posts: 30
    I suspect to get a Neon under an "M" (or a trep for that matter), you would need quite a lift kit! Can't say I've ever seen a Monster "M" or 'Trep. :)
  • roadwarroadwar Posts: 45
    Intrepid with biggest possible engine in front, at least 132 horse Neon engine in back seat(driving rear wheels), blue neon lighting underneath, monster mudder tires for clearance (and panache), 300M emblems for class and Mustang frightening ability, and x1262 as my chauffeur.
    Woo Hoo!
    Sign me up.
  • All these reliability issues can be said about DC, but this is outrageous, but of course they weren't DC car's, the were Chevy's.

    Check it out:
  • marsha7marsha7 Posts: 3,666
    My brother, in Florida, owns a 1995 Intrepid with about 135K miles on it, and still works well. Has needed some major maintenance (A/C compressor, some fuel line problems where the plastic melts or something, and his tranny blew at 70K, but he states that the tranny was his fault because he ignored some warning signs to get it checked), but he likes the car.
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    jeffie (x1262),

    i you need to put on your glasses and read my post again. i never said that the new intrepids are less reliable than the previous generation. what i said in so many words is that new transmissions, etc (doesn't matter if it's an intrepid or accord) aren't as bulletproof as say an old chrysler 727 tranny. that's just the way it is...all manufacturers have skimped on the parts that receive the most abuse. just ask any mechanic who has worked on cars for 20 years.
  • It seems as if the resident crybaby is back! Just when you think someone has gotten over a bad experience, they just keep crying like a little girl!

    Anyway, to whoever is looking at a 98 model, you might be able to get a 99 for a similar price since the intrepid has flooded the rental market recently. Look at the Kelly Blue Book site and it will tell you the trade and retail values of the intrepid. You'll be suprised at how low the trade value is. Not complaining, it was just kind of suprising to discover that the car is valued at about 1/2 of what I paid for it. Hope everyone is enjoying their cars. Any opinions?
  • dc13dc13 Posts: 23
    Following from "emale" posts
    the cars today just aren't built like they used to be. what i said in so many words is that new transmissions,etc (doesn't matter if it's an intrepid or accord) aren't as bulletproof as say an old chrysler 727 tranny.

    From the above, even without glasses, and presumimg the Intrepid is indeed a car, the above sentence could read. The Intrepids ain't built like they use to be baby!!

    Re coach and trade values. If the Intrepids depreciate at such an alarming rate at what point would they reach a negative value?? After my attempt to trade my first Intrepid I quickly realized the true market value on a used one was in the same ball park as a Yugo or Lada.

    BTW coach don't be so hard on yourself no one would call you a cry baby for not being an Intrepid cuddler. Wipe away the tears its only a car, when the time comes replace it with a good Ford, GM, Toyota, Honda, VW, Kia, or anything but a Daimler Chrysler product. As you can see from above even the resident DC cuddler agrees that DC just doesn't make them as good as they use to.
  • Jason5Jason5 Posts: 440
    It's unfortunate that your therapist is on vacation for the summer. It's equally unfortunate that, somewhere along life's journey, you discovered that negative attention is better than no attention. When will you realize that you have lost credibility and validity as a contributing member of this forum?
    Your emissions and gas mileage comparison is clever, but unremarkable for it's "apples to oranges nature" since both vehicles meet REQUIRED emissions standards whether or not one is an LEV and one is ULEV. Your recall and tsb comparison is equally ill contrived--not taking account the original post I challenged with domestic makes. And you STILL have not been able to clear up the drivel that you put out over a year ago, when we first met. In short...while you occasionally get the attention you so desperately appear to need--it's in the form of ridicule, derision, and sympathy. More's the pity I suppose.
  • roadwarroadwar Posts: 45
    truer words never spoken.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,849
    This really applies to everything, from electronic appliances, furniture, automobiles, lawn name it. When emale said "cars today just aren't built like they used to be", I think he was generally refering to the typical 80's/90's car vs the typical 50's/60's/70's car, or 80's car using 70's technology. In addition to my 2000 Intrepid, I also have a 1989 Plymouth Gran Fury with 112,000 miles, a 1968 Dodge Dart with 337,000 miles, and a 1957 DeSoto. I also have a 1967 Pontiac Catalina convertible and used to have a 1979 Chrysler Newport. I can attest that, with every newer generation of cars, they have found ways to cheapen them. They roll the sheetmetal thinner, put more plastics in them, use lighter suspension components, etc...but they have to, in the interests of fuel economy. My Intrepid easily gets 19-20 mpg in city driving. The other cars I mentioned would all get about 13, except for the Pontiac, which gets about 10. The only one that would easily break 20 mpg on the highway was my '79 Newport.

    As for emissions output, when I ran my Newport through the emissions test back in 1997, it passed with no problem...and this was a car I bought from the junkyard, with 230,000 miles on it. Here are the results...

    HC CO CO2
    State: 470ppm 5.00pct 6.0pct
    Newport 162ppm 0.03pct 14.5pct

    If a junkyard car can do this well, I'm sure that most new cars are so clean that any discrepancies between them would be negligible.

    Now I know my Intrepid will never live to be as old as my DeSoto, my Dart, or maybe even my Gran Fury. It's just too complicated, has too much plastic, and too many electronic things that can go wrong. These are just features with any new car, and they will count against it as the car ages. It's not any inherent fault with DC, it's just the way they everybody builds 'em nowadays.
  • fritofrito Posts: 70
    this is verbatim from Concorde|features|perfomance web page:
    LXi´s 225-horsepower 3.2-liter 24 valve V6 is equipped with a
    three-plenum intake manifold for optimum wide-open throttle
    power at high speed. Fuel economy is 20 city, 29 highway.
    (Actual mileage may vary.)

    LX´s 2.7-liter 24-valve V6 sports smooth-running dual overhead
    camshafts and delivers 200 horsepower, making it one of today´s
    most efficiently potent engines. Fuel economy is 18 city, 26
    highway. (Actual mileage may vary.)

    Should someone write these guys and tell them their data is bass-ackwards?

    Anyway, just got back from Vegas (flew - didn't drive). But did ride in many cabs including a '96 Concorde with 370K miles!!! - driver said he thought it was on its second engine; and a '98 Concorde with 130K miles - driver said it has been a great car, no problems.

    I think taxi driving in HOT DESERTS can be added to the list of other uses (police pursuit and pizza delivery via Andre) as a rigorous test of the durability of any car.
  • 2000trep2000trep Posts: 30
    I personally wouldn't buy a 'trep or any other car that was once a rental car. Too many people get them and proceed to drive the @#$% out of them.

    That's my 2 cents.
Sign In or Register to comment.