Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.

2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,316
edited September 2014 in Dodge

image2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye Long-Term Road Test

Our Long-Term Test of the 2013 Dodge Dart SXT Rallye is complete after one year and 19,500 miles. You may be surprised to see how it performed.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • fordson1fordson1 Unconfirmed Posts: 1,512
    And NO BYLINE on the wrap-up. Says it all, really - no one person wanted to take the responsibility for this journalistic memory-hole exercise.
  • noburgersnoburgers Member Posts: 500
    The Dart was truly a disappointment--one of the few real duds in the long term fleet that I can ever recall. It's a real shame too--I had high hopes that Dodge had a great small car to offer.
  • noburgersnoburgers Member Posts: 500
    @fordson at least there was a wrap up article. So many wrap-ups were not done at all over the past year. Also, I hate how you can't see comments unless you comment.
  • nukeedmundsnukeedmunds Member Posts: 5
    Nevermind all the other woes of this insufferable little [non-permissible content removed], that you sort-of acknowledge and then cheerily dismiss. Door handles and fender trim don't fall off well built automobiles. Properly engineered-and-assembled cars don't crack their own windshields. Responsible automakers don't foist vehicles on their intellectually-challenged customer base with sharp metal clips in one of the most frequently-accessed areas of the car... but hey, all's good as long as Edmunds staff continues to [non-permissible content removed] the Fiasler reps, so all those free cars keep coming, eh? Seriously, you people need to be publicly chastised for this drivel.
  • zimtheinvaderzimtheinvader Member Posts: 580
    at least you were only almost stranded and it only happened twice. I'm sure with a baby in the backseat or a young family that wouldn't have been stressful at all.
  • ocramidajzjocramidajzj Member Posts: 91
    Leaving you stranded and limping are considered minor? Iw ould consider this stressful and questioning reliability.
  • kokomojoekokomojoe Member Posts: 150
    Having owned a Dart in the early 70's I found this one just does not live up to the name. Style is okay but it's not a Dodge.
    This car is closer to Fiat than Chrysler.
  • gofortheneckgofortheneck Member Posts: 42
    Why would Chrysler Corp. create a world-car compact with sheet metal that so closely invokes the failed Neon?

    Must be the same type of executive suite stupidity that keeps getting their cars rated as "unreliable".
  • darthbimmerdarthbimmer Member Posts: 606
    36% depreciation is pretty steep for a mass market car. I wonder if that's a consequence of it being $16k base car with $9k of options. My limited personal experience is that inexpensive cars with uncommon performance options (like a turbo engine) do not hold their value well. Unless it developed a cult following, buyers on the secondary market look at it and see only "econobox".
  • nukeedmundsnukeedmunds Member Posts: 5
    Direct link to comments: http://www.edmunds.com/dodge/dart/2013/long-term-road-test/wrap-up-commentspage.html?
  • hybrishybris Member Posts: 365
    Wow this is low for you guys seriously. You wrap up a LT test without posting it to the main blog which in of its self is unusual since you guys love to keep wrapped up cars on the blog roll for at least a month or two until you get something new. -------------------- But to then give us no after action report on the misfire beyond "It was a bad spark plug." really stinks of either just poor management on the writing side or deals being made with Chrysler. --------------------------------------------------------- Again I question why I bother come to this blog besides mere habit and mild boredom as everything from worth while cars to look forward to reading about to (this is a big one) daily or every other day updates on the fleet as weeks are now piling on before we get much of anything even including RTFM moments. --- By the way I came here by way of nukeedmunds that alone should show just how the community is not happy with the state of things and we are not happy with the blog then why would we use any of Edmunds services and features if/when we start to look for new vehicles?
  • brianknightbrianknight Member Posts: 7
    Wait a minute... what about the "Weak A/C" that was innefective one update, yet good enough to keep the car cooled when using remote start?

    I also don't think we've heard nearly the full story on the "misfire" and the aftermath. The cynic in me thinks we might have gotten more (some) details if Edmunds had paid for the car itself.

    Your credibility is heading a bit south here, Edmunds.
  • gslippygslippy Member Posts: 514
    "A lazy transmission and a few minor maintenance issues were the only things that kept us from being more enthusiastic about the Dart overall."

    You guys are a joke, and you didn't even have the guts to post this so-called 'wrap-up' alongside the other dismal reports. Some poor consumer is going to pay retail for this car that you may have negligently ruined in its last drive. With the Dodge Dart ads running in the margins, it's easy to see that your truth-telling as journalists has its limits. Eventually, people will catch on that you're in the pockets of whoever's paying the bills, and your puff pieces on these vehicles carry no weight.
  • gslippygslippy Member Posts: 514
    By the way, thanks to nukeedmunds for the link. Too bad this didn't appear at the end of the other blog posts for this car. But it wouldn't have mattered anyway, since this car wasn't so bad except for poor driving dynamics, uncomfortable seats, bad A/C, a broken door handle, sharp edges in the trunk, an inhaled spark plug with untold consequences, and steep depreciation. But hey, it was a free loaner from Dodge (who also pays the bills in the margin ads), so who really cares? There is a word for someone who sells themselves to anyone willing to pay.
  • ocramidajzjocramidajzj Member Posts: 91
    Why can't we see the comments?
  • duck87duck87 Member Posts: 649
    You guys should have let nukedetroit write this, I'm betting that post may single-handedly revive Insideline levels of comments and views.
  • fordson1fordson1 Unconfirmed Posts: 1,512
    Ping...
  • nukeedmundsnukeedmunds Member Posts: 5
    duck, I posted my comments down thread. Edmunds obviously has a problem with the truth, and those who post it, so I've had to 'modify' my login information.

    And I dare anyone to refute my comments.
  • gslippygslippy Member Posts: 514
    Where has the comments section gone for the Dart wrap-up? Can't take the reader heat?
  • gslippygslippy Member Posts: 514
    Not that I'll get an answer, but I'll ask - how was the Dart disposed of? Since it was a loaner, I suppose it went back to the local Dodge dealer's lot, only to be sold at an inflated price to an unsuspecting customer. I wonder if the CarFax will show anything except a replaced windshield since the fix was in on this vehicle. Here's another question - you see fit to purchase so many of the other long-term vehicles, yet you took this inexpensive mainstream compact as a loaner - why? I should have realized right away that the car's true ownership would sway the outcome. Frankly, I don't believe you about the spark plug. You've never described how that problem was actually fixed; I'll still bet it destroyed the engine. But you're willing to let people think a simple $5 spark plug replacement is all that was needed. That's like saying the Space Shuttle Challenger just had a bad O-ring, without telling the rest of the story. The delay of many weeks only added to our suspicions; without full disclosure, we draw our own conclusions. Unfortunately, I will not be directing readers to your site for reliable information any more, since you're obviously bought. Slow Dart sales have resulted in the furlough of its assemblers for a week - too bad for them, but not surprising since the market has caught on to what a terrible car it is. Edmunds, you had an opportunity to sync your findings with the voice of the market, but instead you've chosen the darker path. The Dart is the wrong product to fall on your sword for.
  • daddioddaddiod Member Posts: 2
    This has got to be the strangest departure from the LT fleet since I have been reading Edmunds LT articles.
    What was the resolution on the issue causing the misfire problems on the way to SF? Did you ever make it back from SF?
    Or did Dodge come and take back the car since they had "provided the vehicle for the purpose of evaluation"?
    This is pretty weak journalistic work considering that the whole purpose of a long term test is to give consumers a sense of how a car will fair in real life and what kind of problems tend to surface.

    Strange, Strange, Strange....
  • gslippygslippy Member Posts: 514
    @daddiod: As you can see, Edmunds is totally mum and non-apologetic about how this LT test concluded. It's safe to assume they were compromised, and Edmunds won't even come out and deny it. And it makes you wonder about the validity of their other work
  • shelburnerick_shelburnerick_ Member Posts: 1
    This car is one example is why I hold onto my (less than spectacular) 2000 Oldsmobile Alero: similar interior and trunk space, similar mpg (I've repeatedly seen 38mpg U.S. hwy from Brockville, ON to Evansville, IN) with good but not great reliability. After 13 years, I'd expect some significant improvements !
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles