Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Dodge Intrepid

12357111

Comments

  • dc13dc13 Posts: 23
    Intrepid 2736cc 200hp @ 5800 rpm
    Hwy 7.5 litres/100km
    City 11.7 litres/100km

    Intrepid ES 2736cc 202hp @ 5800 rpm
    Hwy 7.4 litres/100km
    City 11.7 litres/100km

    Intrepid R/T 3518cc 242hp @ 6400 rpm
    Hwy 8.2 litres/100km
    City 12.8 litres/100km
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    frito,

    here are the epa numbers in a more readable format as opposed to jeffies post above:

    2.7l 21/city 30 highway
    2.7l (active intake - on es) 20/city 29 highway
    3.2l 18/city 28 highway
    3.5l 18/city 27 highway
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    binu,

    i occasionally notice a quick flicker of my dash lights and a momentary dimming of the headlights but i don't think they are simultaneous with each other. however, i'm not sure, so i'll pay more attention next time i'm driving at night. this flicker/momentary dimming business is something i have noticed on every intrepid i've owned (96,98 and 00) so it seems to be the nature of this dodge/chrysler beast. however, i must admit there does seem to be something especially wacky with yours. it almost seems like yours is trying to act like it has automatic headlights and doesn't know whether to switch them on or off. and as i understand it, the only difference between an lxi concorde's manual headlights and the auto-on headlights in the 300m is the actual headlight switch. apparently everything you need for auto headlights is already resident in your lxi except for the proper headlight switch. so...maybe you need a new switch installed?? just a thought.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    The window sticker on my 2000 base Intrepid says 20 city/29 highway. I've seen a lot of sources quote 21/30, though. Did they change the rating at some point in the model year? I bought mine on November 6 of last year.
    -Andre
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    they do change occasionally, for whatever reason. my 98 3.2l was rated at 29 on the highway and my 00 3.2l is rated at 28. go figure. anyway, the numbers i posted were from 2000 model info off the daimlerchrysler media site.
  • fastdriverfastdriver Posts: 2,273
    binu-

    email is right. IF you have automatic temperature control on your car, then all the wiring is there for the automatic headlights. All you have to do is purchase the "A" headlight switch for $90.85. I THINK that's what it cost Chrysler when they put it on my early model 300M that did NOT have it when it came from the factory.

    Ask in the 300M topic area. I know that someone there knows.

    fastdriver
  • dc13dc13 Posts: 23
    Sorry I forgot and posted in the world format, obtained from Daimler's home site, sorry for the oversight.
  • homerkchomerkc Posts: 113
    I, too, have noticed a significant difference with a fully loaded car (at least in power, though I haven't measured mileage as such.) My 30 mpg was with a light load - two men and very little luggage. With five adults in the car driving around town, I remember a noticable drop in pull from stoplights.
  • Jason5Jason5 Posts: 440
    Interesting. My 2000 ES (built in October 1999) with 3.2 is rated at 19 city/29 highway as per sticker. I did notice in the 1st gen Intrepid that the mileage for the old 3.5 was one mpg less for city when it was equipped with the (then) optional AutoStick.
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    hey jason,

    i just checked my window sticker and the epa mileage is 19/28. and the car was built in october! the only difference i can remember between your car and mine is that i have the moonroof and also the cold weather package (batter and block heater). surely those two items wouldn't be enough to drop the mileage?? then again...
  • faddahfaddah Posts: 4
    I am looking for some advice from all of the intelligent and more experienced Intrepid owners who visit this topic. I currently own a '92 Honda Civic Hatchback- great car, but too small now. I'm very excited about the Intrepid. Overall, it looks and sounds like a great car although I haven't test driven one yet. With my resources, I could get a new 2000 base or a used 1999 ES. While the ES would have some miles on it, there are some features which I prefer on it over the base. Any thoughts on a new vs. used Intrepid?
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    faddah,

    i prefer to drive new, only because i know where that car has been, plus you have a full warranty and the benefit of any upgrades that have occurred. however, you can get used intrepids for a real good price since resale has been somewhat dismal. if you decide to go new, you might as well wait until the 01s are out which will be in a couple weeks. i believe dodge has already put some incentives on those cars but i'm not sure. plus, there are supposed to be some changes like the addition of a side air bag option.
  • fluidfluid Posts: 5
    My ES, built in October 1999, shows 19/28 on the sticker.

    Jay T
    00 IR ES
  • dc13dc13 Posts: 23
    Even a 00 Intrepid would not match the dependability of your 92 Honda. If however you do decide to buy the Intrepid the newer the better. With DC losing a large part of the rental business there will be incentives on the 01 models.
    I totally agree with emale the resale of the Intrepid is dismal, the quality is dismal, dependability is dismal, in fact the Intrepid is just another very ordinary car suitable for the anything will do crowd.
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    faddah,

    i'm sure you can smell a rat, eh!

    jason, et al...
    just caught a glimpse of the new stratus coupe. not bad!! if it were a tad bigger it would be the perfect intrepid coupe! its front and especially rear end styling remind me alot of the intrepid...definitely not a bad thing!
  • dc13dc13 Posts: 23
    Stratus that looks like an Intrepid, alot of people are beginning to think the Intrepid design is becoming dated. Again someone at Chrysler must have thought it to be a whale of an idea to continue with that design. The "old Breeze and Cirrus were the only two in the Chrysler herd to obtain quality awards. The Intrepid was rated at below industry standards even in Chryslers own internal review. Maybe the mini Intrepid will be improved time will tell.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    I have a 2000 Intrepid base model that I've put about 22,500 miles on in the 9 months I've had it. I put about 300+ miles a week on it just delivering pizzas. Delivery driving is probably one of the most severe tests you can put on a car, short of police pursuit or taking it off-roading.

    I've had to get some things fixed on the car, but nothing so far due to any fault of the car itself. Things like a flat tire, bumper damage from rear-ending another car, broken door handle from an attempted break-in, disconnected parking brake handle from Circuit City alarm installation (which they had to come out and fix on the spot because the car was stranded).

    My mileage has ranged from a low of high 18's to around 30. I'll probably put about 30K miles a year on this car, so it'll have around 150K when it's paid off (If I don't trade it in by then)

    We have another delivery driver who has a 1997 Intrepid ES with about 80K miles on it. He says he's never had a bit of trouble on it. I've heard a lot of complaints about the first generation (1993-1997) LH cars, but have also heard a lot of praise for them, too. I guess there are some good ones out there.

    Personally, the only bad Mopar experience I've had was a 1988 Lebaron turbo coupe that was junkyard-ready in almost every respect by around 118K miles. Turbo was shot, head had just been replaced, rest of engine was about to go, a/c was gone, paint worn through to bare metal but still shiny in other spots, headliner falling down, broken power antenna, and a trip computer/electronic gauge cluster that would lie to you about almost anything.

    If I had it to do over again, the only other car I might consider would be an Impala, but only for its bigger engine and more legroom up front. I'm 6'3", and find the Intrepid to be a bit short in legroom up front with the standard seats, but a power seat could be adjusted so that it would be comfortable for me.

    Anyway, good luck with your purchase.
    -Andre
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    This past weekend delivering pizzas, I made sure to notice exactly what the conditions are when my Intrepid's lights flicker. When they do, it's just the headlights, not the interior lights, and they do it whether the a/c is on or not. I think it's just when the electric fan kicks on it puts a momentary drain on the system.
    -Andre
  • 2000trep2000trep Posts: 30
    in my humble opinion... i hardly think so. it's only been out 3 years now. now the chevy silverado... that's a dated design. it has changed a little in recent years. but it is overall the same design as 15 years ago.

    andre> man! you're really stacking the miles on!
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    2000trep,

    agree completely. the intrepid is an awesome design that is standing the test of time very well. the troll who says it isn't is always trying to elicit some sort of response by posting the same garbage - over and over! oh, and about internal reviews, i'm still chuckling over that one!
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    I have to agree with you guys, 2000trep and emale on this. I think the Intrepid is one of the few modern designs that looks really good, and will continue to look good years from now. By comparison, the Chevy Impala looks kind of like they took the pieces from the previous two Luminas and the Celebrity, mixed them up, and put together whatever would fit. It's got a look that kind of grows on you, after the initial shock wears off. The new Malibu looks like an overblown Geo Prism...hardly the cutting edge of style. The new Ford Taurus is kind of ungainly looking, but not nearly as nasty as the catfish-look of the 1995-1999 models...although for some reason I like the new Sable. As for foreign cars...I've mistaken the new Maxima for a Buick more than a couple of times from the front, and a Neon from the rear. The Toyota Camry...yawn. Kind of has a nice practical charm about it, like a late 60's AMC product. Or a toaster oven. And the Volkwagen Passat...I swear they lifted that roofline off of some late 40's Chevy or Plymouth fastback.

    When I deliver pizzas, I get little kids oohing and ahhing over the car all the time. When's the last time a little kid got excited about a 4-door family car??
    -Andre
  • The current big Chrysler cars are the best styled big cars around. They're all unique enough to appeal to different groups of buyers. My favorites are the Intrepid and the 300.
  • pharmdpharmd Posts: 7
    I am looking at a 98 intrepid but I have some concerns with such a big car only having 6 cylinders. How is the performance and does it really matter between the 2.7L and the 3.2L? I have seen comments on this before but can't remember and have just spent an hour trying to find answers. Can someone make it easy for me and just tell me. Thanks.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,496
    I have a 2000 Intrepid with the base 2.7, and it's pretty decent for the most part. If you regularly carry more than 2 people, a lot of luggage, or drive in hilly/mountainous terrain, you might want a 3.2. The 2.7 has 200 horsepower and the 3.2 has 225, which sound like nice numbers, but the torque on the 2.7 is only around 190 ft-pounds. I don't know what it is on the 3.2...I want to say 225 also, but I'm not sure. Anyway, these are relatively small engines that rely more on high revs for horsepower than stump-pulling power.

    I haven't driven a 3.2, or an ES with the 2.7 with its additional 2 horsepower, so I can't comment on how much better they perform. I've seen performance figures somewhere before, but don't quote me on this...
    2.7 base: 0-60 9.5 seconds
    3.2 ES: 0-60 8.5 seconds
    3.5 R/T: 0-60 7.8 seconds

    -Andre
  • Jason5Jason5 Posts: 440
    Re: rats. You know my opinion of anyone who won't supply an email address with their log-on info. I wouldn't be surprised if "someone" were posting messages simply to reply to them him or herself.
    Can't explain the EPA stickers?? Go figure! Perhaps something in the northeast emissions vs. other locations? I saw a bright silver Stratus R/T coupe at a local dealer two weeks ago. Very very attractive. Salesman said it ran and handled well too.
    Regarding the dated design comment...Consider the source. When will we all learn not to encourage petulent children....
  • Just a somewhat newby to this forum stuff. I've updated my profile with email info
    Joe
  • x1262x1262 Posts: 7
    The jelly bean styled Intrepid is eight years old, I don't really think that design could be classed as modern, perhaps outdated would be a better description.
  • I smell a couple of rats here!
  • Agree with you. These guys don't know how to find their butts with both hands. the Intrepid design is three years old, not eight. It looks better now than most of the "new" designs coming out. Why don't you losers go hang around in the Daewoo forum where the real styling is?
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380
    copperhead and 300forme,

    the couple of rats you mention are in actuality just one! a rat with many names, a few of which he can no longer use!
Sign In or Register to comment.