backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 38 comment(s) - last by andrinoaa.. on May 2 at 7:14 AM

Chrysler Aspen

Dodge Durango
Yes, it still has a HEMI

Chrysler doesn't want to be left out in the development of hybrid vehicles and is racing to get two full-size SUV hybrids out the door in 2008. Chrysler's first hybrid vehicles available in North America will come in the form of the Dodge Durango and it's blinged out counterpart: the Chrysler Aspen.

Both SUVs will feature the infamous 5.7 liter V8 HEMI engine with Multi-displacement System (MDS) and a two-mode hybrid system. The hybrid system was developed in conjunction with General Motors and the BMW Group.

Power will come from the electric motors alone, the 5.7 liter HEMI engine or any combination of the two. In addition, two electronic continuously variable transmission (ECVT) modes as well as a transmission with four forward gears are also available.

"The all-new Chrysler Group HEMI Hybrid will offer our customers the best of both worlds: renowned performance and significantly improved fuel economy," said Frank Klegon, Executive VP of Product Development for the Chrysler Group. "With the new HEMI-powered Chrysler Aspen Hybrid, we are delivering the ultimate combination of fuel efficiency, overall performance and capability in a premium full-size SUV."

Chrysler estimates that overall fuel economy for the big SUVs will improve by 25 percent. City MPG is expected to be boosted by 40 percent. The 4WD versions of the Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango are currently rated at by the EPA for 14/19 (city/highway) 2007 and 13/18 for 2008.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
They still don't get it
By jcrash on 4/30/2007 4:27:55 PM , Rating: 5
If an American car company would decide to throw caution to the wind and make the most economical lineup across all makes, they would take the lead in car sales back.

LESS HP, LESS SIZE... it will work. Just do it.




RE: They still don't get it
By gramboh on 4/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: They still don't get it
By AmpedSilence on 4/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: They still don't get it
By Oregonian2 on 4/30/2007 5:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
Such things are done on a massive scale.

In cars, my old Chrysler T&C is the same as
a Dodge and a Plymouth minivan (except for the
options, where the T&C is optioned "above" that
could be done with the other two -- at least in the
year I got it).

In laundry soaps, there's a thousand brands. At least
half are all the same company. The major difference between
the different products is the texture and color (according to
something I was told by someone who should know), but after
being dissolved in the wash water are pretty much the same
thing. You think you're given lots of choices with the idea
that you are made happy (so long as one of theirs is picked).

One clothes manufacturer will have a zillion brands and
although the details are different, they all have an opening
for a head, two arms, legs.

The Durango and Aspen wouldn't be the same, they'd be optioned
(and priced) differently, with the Aspen likely the higher end
version. Like having the higher-end shirt even though it's made
by the same guy in Tunisia.


RE: They still don't get it
By Sahrin on 4/30/2007 5:51:27 PM , Rating: 2
Every manufacturer does this - even the vaunted Japanese brands. GM, for one instance: Chevy Suburban, GMC Denali, Cadillac Escalade. It's not particularly clever or original.

The primary reasons this is done is because you can develop a "platform" (wheelbase, frame/unibody, transmission, engines) and apply that to multiple models - design the car around the main components. This saves a LOT of money, as you might imagine. The "cookie cutter" cars are usually done to support the multiple brands that manufacturers have (GM is traditionally the worst at this, as they have 5 brands where the typical automaker has 3 mainline brands). Dealers who have a Chrysler franchise want to be able to offer the same vehicles as dealers who have a Dodge franchise, as they are *technically* in competition with each other.


RE: They still don't get it
By andrinoaa on 5/1/2007 2:06:25 AM , Rating: 2
Why don't we all just drive a Kenworth. You definetly will be safe in a crash with an SUV LOL


RE: They still don't get it
By Samus on 5/1/2007 2:09:45 AM , Rating: 2
Look at GM, the king of branding. At least Ford is lax on doing this sort of thing, usually only sharing platforms between Ford or Mercury (Lincoln, Jaguar except the X-type, Land Rover and Volvo vehicles are generally unique platforms)

But then theirs Mazda, which Ford mostly owns and has used platforms from for over 20 years.

Escort=323/Protege
Ranger=Mazda B Truck
Fusion=626
Probe=MX6
Escape=Tribute

The list goes on there...

But at least Ford has many unique platforms that were never used outside of Ford/Mercury, such as the Tempo/Topaz, Taurus/Sable, Crown Vic, Mustang/Capri.

But I guess a few SUV's work their way up too, from the Expedition to the Mountaineer to the Navigator.


RE: They still don't get it
By Super on 4/30/2007 4:38:03 PM , Rating: 2
[sarcasm]But what will mommy do when she goes to get groceries by herself and she's minus 200hp?[/sarcasm]

I wish the auto-industry would wake up and start making more economical vehicles. There is a need for larger engines with lots of horsepower and torque, but it's not needed for the city commuter and mother of 1 who needs to run errands around town and get groceries.


RE: They still don't get it
By Oregonian2 on 4/30/2007 5:42:09 PM , Rating: 2
That mommy would be in the market for a SUV (what these are)?

She can buy a Dacia, cheap and small (including its engine).


RE: They still don't get it
By lucyfek on 5/1/2007 12:51:33 AM , Rating: 2
having no other selling point, they have to sell them per pound.
now all is clear.


RE: They still don't get it
By borowki on 4/30/2007 5:39:04 PM , Rating: 2
But American car buyers won't throw caution into the wind. It's dangerous to drive a small car among small SUVs. Driving a Fiat Panda could get you killed in a collison.


RE: They still don't get it
By Oregonian2 on 4/30/2007 5:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
But then the company making these is a German company. But you say, they make in them in the USA (and Canada)? Well, Honda does too, but they still seem to be called Japanese cars.

The Aspen is therefore a German car. :-)


RE: They still don't get it
By Hoser McMoose on 5/1/2007 5:43:20 PM , Rating: 3
Everyone please repeat after me:

SIZE DOES NOT EQUAL SAFETY! (Yes I am yelling)

If you want a safe vehicle you need intelligent design, NOT a few thousand pounds of steel around you. I'm not saying that a Fiat Panda is a safe car (I haven't a clue one way or the other), but simply being big definitely is NOT the solution.

The numbers have come back time and again, despite being large, SUVs are no safer for the occupants of the vehicle than most sedans. The problem is simply that they handle like crap and weigh so much that it's very difficult to stop the things in an emergency. End result? You're more likely to be IN a collision in an SUV in the first place.

Here's a fairly recent comparison of some vehicles:

http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr4204.pdf

Notice that the absolute LEAST safe vehicle to drive in is a Chevy Blazer (2WD/2-door). At 232 deaths per 100M vehicles on the road is was more than 3 times more dangerous than either a Toyota Echo or a MINI Cooper and more than 10 times worse than a similar sized Lexus RX330.

If American car buyers are REALLY interested in safety, they would be buying either minivans or import luxury vehicles.


RE: They still don't get it
By cornfedone on 4/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: They still don't get it
By Grast on 5/1/2007 4:14:37 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree with your stance for a quality, good performance, and clean emissions, where do you get off blaming the consumer for $3.00 gas?

Please take a macro-economics class and learn how supply and demand works. Gas is $3.00 a gallon for two real reasons.

1. Demand is higher than supply due to limited supply capability. This is due to no new refiries being built in the last 20 years.
2. Gasoline is a commoditiy. As thus, factors outside supply and demand can raize and lower prices. IE... A war in Iraq, Iran flipping the rest of the world off....

There is no awnser to this issue other than migrate off of gasoline for autos. However, that will not happen until some other type of alternate energy carrier is available and cheap energy can be generated in sufficiant quantities.

Later...


RE: They still don't get it
By theapparition on 5/1/07, Rating: -1
RE: They still don't get it
By jskirwin on 5/1/2007 10:09:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You also see the massive amount of hp increase in ALL autos, import and domestic. You may like small underpowered cars, but the buying public in general does not.


I don't have a dog in this fight because I myself prefer small, fuel efficient cars that are boring but perform well (yes, I'm describing the lowly Honda Civic). However, I agree completely with your statement. In fact, it appears that the bulk of hybrid technology is being used to boost hp instead of fuel efficiency.

This may be due to an "arms race" on the American road. Americans in my area (Megacity 1) drive extremely fast and aggressively. You need the extra hp to compete with the increasing hp of the other cars on the road. Even in extremely congested areas I've in traffic that is nearly bumper-bumper and running at 70mph. When an accident happens, it always involves 3 or more cars. It's insane, but it's reality - and I think that Americans are stuck in the arms race and buying accordingly.


RE: They still don't get it
By GoatMonkey on 5/1/2007 11:23:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Americans are stuck in the arms race and buying accordingly

So that means if we had nuclear cars we would all be afraid to use them and pollution would drop massively!


RE: They still don't get it
By andrinoaa on 5/2/2007 7:14:42 AM , Rating: 2
I just saw an evil alien in the streets around lil old melbourne town (australia, 53rd state of the union)It was labelled F250 -- F#$%^&*G hell what a monster! And you guys actually drive these things? Whats the economy 2miles/gallon? The arms race has been exported! LOL LOL


HEMI?
By Guigsy on 4/30/2007 5:18:17 PM , Rating: 2
I know having a Hemi engine is an emotive thing (in the US anyway), but it's old INEFFICIENT technology. It was a breakthrough in its day (100 years old according to Wiki), but 4 valves per cylinder has long since overtaken it. Why put an inefficient gas engine in a hybrid arrangement?




RE: HEMI?
By JDub02 on 4/30/2007 5:55:06 PM , Rating: 3
The new Hemi isn't much like the old one. That's kind of like saying the 2007 Chevy Impala is using the same technology as a 1962 Impala. Same name, two different things. The auto industry does it all the time for marketing.

DC's new Hemi engine is a vast improvement over the Chrysler 318/360 it replaced in every category: horsepower, torque, and fuel economy.


RE: HEMI?
By Guigsy on 4/30/2007 6:12:15 PM , Rating: 3
But it's still only two valves per cylinder. If Hemi were a good design, (non-restricted) race engines wouldn't have abandoned it in the 1970s. Instead, just about everything is now 4 valves per cylinder as it's more efficient, produces more power, and with a bit of VVT, just as much torque at the same time.

If you want an SUV with a brute of an engine, but still some economy, why not get a diesel?

(PS I'm European, just in case you hadn't guessed from my lack of nostalgia for the Hemi).


RE: HEMI?
By emdub on 4/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: HEMI?
By theapparition on 5/1/2007 8:05:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But it's still only two valves per cylinder. If Hemi were a good design, (non-restricted) race engines wouldn't have abandoned it in the 1970s. Instead, just about everything is now 4 valves per cylinder as it's more efficient, produces more power, and with a bit of VVT, just as much torque at the same time.

Completely incorrect. There are advantages to both designs, and both can be used effectively in the right application. OHC designs (4-5valves per cylinder) are freer flowing but require higher revs to produce the same power, while sacrificing low end torque. OHV (2 valves per cylinder) rev lower, require higher displacement, but produce more low end torque and power. Neigher one is explicitly more efficient.

Advantages to pushrod OHV technology:
Ligher
Shorter engine
Less complexity/maintenance
More low end power and torque
Cheaper

Advantages to OHC technology:
Freer flowing
Quick reving
Modular design

VVT can be acomplished in either design, so that's a wash. The modular approach is probably the biggest reason many manufactures have swictched to OHC designs (cuts costs).

Don't believe me?

2007 Lexus GS 350 3.5L V6
303hp, 29mpg max

2007 Ferrari F430 4.3L V8
490hp, 17mpg max

2008 Chevrolet Corvette 6.2L OHV
430hp, 29mpg max

Lets see, ~130hp more than the Lexus, with same EPA rating, vs 60hp less, but 12mpg higher. Yeah, that old technology really sucks, doesn't it?


RE: HEMI?
By GoatMonkey on 5/1/2007 11:30:42 AM , Rating: 2
I actually agree with you, but you can't compare a Corvette to a Lexus GS, it's a heavier and larger car. Probably the closest thing that Lexus makes to a Corvette is the SC430. You could make a case for comparing it to an Infiniti G37, or a Nissan Skyline maybe also.


RE: HEMI?
By theapparition on 5/1/2007 12:07:05 PM , Rating: 2
There is probably many cars that I could have compared to. But size of the car doesn't matter, weight does, but it's not that big of a difference.

2007 G35 curb weight 3583lbs
2007 Corvette curb weight 3199lbs

Close to 400lbs does not equate to ~130hp differential.


RE: HEMI?
By hubajube on 5/1/2007 12:47:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But size of the car doesn't matter, weight does, but it's not that big of a difference.
400 lbs is a HUGE difference!!!! A heavier car will always require more energy to move and stop.


RE: HEMI?
By theapparition on 5/1/2007 1:22:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
400 lbs is a HUGE difference!!!! A heavier car will always require more energy to move and stop.

400lbs is NOT a huge difference considering there are many cars that weigh 1000lbs over the G35.

Think of it this way, two identical cars, one with two heafty lumberjacks, the other with two anorexic bikini models. One will get less milage, but not that much.
Do you worry about gas milage when you shove your friends in the car.....assuming you have friends :-)


RE: HEMI?
By Spyvie on 4/30/2007 6:24:24 PM , Rating: 3
“HEMI” is slang for “Hemispherical Combustion Chamber” The term refers to innovations in cylinder head designs Chrysler came up with in the 60s to improve air/fuel mixture combustion in its V8 engines. The technology has long since been improved upon to the point that the best combustion chambers are no longer hemispherical and are in fact usually a much more complex shape.

“HEMI” is little more than a marketing term today.

A 2007 Chevy (with a V8) and a 62 Impala use almost identical engine tech, the only real difference being electronic ignition and fuel injection in the 07.


Aspen
By Goty on 4/30/2007 5:18:40 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't Dodge make an Aspen back in the 70s that was a sports car?




RE: Aspen
By Anh Huynh on 4/30/2007 7:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
Not even close, the Dodge Aspen of the '70s was an economy car. It came in coupe, sedan and wagon configurations. They were known to rust prematurely, ie 1-2 years later they'd have a bunch of rust on them.

There was also the Plymouth twin, the Volare.

http://www.allpar.com/model/aspen.html


RE: Aspen
By Goty on 4/30/2007 8:17:10 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the R/Ts and SuperCoupes were sports cars (or as close as you got to one in the late 70s/early 80s.


RE: Aspen
By marvdmartian on 5/1/2007 11:08:33 AM , Rating: 2
Vo-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-lar-ay, ohhh oh!! Vo-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-lar-ay, ohh ohh oh oh!!
Sorry, couldn't help myself! ;)

Man, to say that anything made between 1974 and about 1982 was a "sports" car, with just a few exceptions, is really a stretch!! Remember, most of the cars produced in the 70's were underpowered (detuned) in a vain attempt by Detroit to squeeze more gas mileage out of the oversized engines they had in them. Just look at what happened to HP versus output numbers between 1970 and 1980! Early 70's muscle cars were squeezing high HP & torque out of large output engines. Mid to late 70's cars were oftentimes only getting 200 (or less!!) HP out of a large block V8!

Sadly, much the way they are today, Detroit was slow in getting rid of the old gas guzzling monster engines. Shoot, I had a 1980 Chevy (a Monza, if I remember correctly) that had a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder that was lucky to get 20mpg on the highway, and yet was probably pushing out no more HP than the 1.6 and 1.8 liter engines put out by the Japanese car companies! Now it's 35 years later, and they're still not getting it!

Yes, there's definitely room in the inventory for larger vehicles that don't get very good gas mileage. But they shouldn't be the backbone of your offerings when gasoline is staying over $2.50 a gallon! Hello? Can you hear me?? General Motors? Ford Motor Company? Daimler-Chrysler?? Hello????


good god
By AmpedSilence on 4/30/2007 4:26:07 PM , Rating: 2
18 mpg on the highway? That's horrible.

But i guess it is a large car; i don't know much about this stuff... I just looks bad to me.




RE: good god
By Mazzer on 4/30/2007 5:11:31 PM , Rating: 2
If you even get 18mpg on the highway. I am assuming that the 14/18 is under the old figures and odds are you are getting considerably less mileage. So to combat the terrible mpg they are adding heavy batteries to an already heavy vehicle, with the extra premium for batteries. I figure since dodge/Chrysler can't sell these vehicles they are trying to get people onto the lot by claiming high millage numbers. Really if you need a large vehicle with storage space and room for 6-7 passengers buy a minivan. I guess you do lose the horsepower but if you want power then go out and buy a small car with a big engine and still retain mpg in the mid 20s.


RE: good god
By Oregonian2 on 4/30/2007 5:52:10 PM , Rating: 3
For numbers,... my '96 Chrysler T&C minivan is pretty good sized and it gets 22~24 mpg on summer trips with the A/C running. Has the V-6 engine. Power is "okay", but not the 375 HP my old Cadillac used to have (my first car out of college ("pre-owned")).


hybrid HEMI huh?
By thejez on 4/30/2007 4:50:14 PM , Rating: 4
so do they call a hybrid HEMI a SEMI-HEMI?




RE: hybrid HEMI huh?
By wushuktl on 4/30/2007 7:02:48 PM , Rating: 2
i sure as hell hope it's going to be called that :D


"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki