2012 Dodge Dart

[Scott Bechler]

Originally Posted by Todd Boyer

As owner of an original '69 Dart Swinger 340 4-speed, that car is not deserving of the name.

In that case, the first generation of compact Darts ('63-66) were not deserving of the name either. '63 top engine 225 - 145 gross horsepower or about 115 by today's net ratings. '64 273 - 180 gross hp. '65 273 4bbl - 235 gross hp.

Remeber "Dart" has always meant economy car. 184 net hp for the new 2.4L is pretty good for an economy car. Now if they decide to make a turbo version of the 2.4 in the future, 275-300 hp stock is a real possibility. With much more power with the "turn of a screw" as people like to tell Art.

I do hate the fact that it is a foreign chassis with the Dart name.

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by Scott Bechler

In that case, the first generation of compact Darts ('63-66) were not deserving of the name either. '63 top engine 225 - 145 gross horsepower or about 115 by today's net ratings. '64 273 - 180 gross hp. '65 273 4bbl - 235 gross hp.

Remeber "Dart" has always meant economy car. 184 net hp for the new 2.4L is pretty good for an economy car. Now if they decide to make a turbo version of the 2.4 in the future, 275-300 hp stock is a real possibility. With much more power with the "turn of a screw" as people like to tell Art.

I do hate the fact that it is a foreign chassis with the Dart name.

The original Darts were much more deserving of the name, because they were compact versions of the much beloved Coronets (as well as ALL-AMERICAN!!!), but your last sentence touched on why I also hate this...a great name for a great (AMERICAN) compact car, now adorns an import derived car!

I'm glad that at least Mustang loyalist protested (in large numbers), Fords warped minded intention of placing that beloved name on what eventually became the Probe! I wish Nova owners would've done the same thing....

[gonzo1066]

Is the new Dart any worse than ANY of the many Cobalts?? Talk about Fugly cars IMHO

[GarysZ24]

Originally Posted by gonzo1066

Is the new Dart any worse than ANY of the many Cobalts?? Talk about Fugly cars IMHO

No it's not, but at least the name of a great American car doesn't adorn it. I mean, Chevrolet could've called the Cobalt (egads), a Chevelle! However, they didn't THANK GOD!!! Instead they did what I wish Dodge would've done, and created a new name for a totally different car (or brought back the Colt or Shadow names), instead of insulting the name of a great pony car from the muscle car era.

Chevrolet, don't get any warped minded ideas about tarnishing the great Chevelle name unless you're going to do what Dodge did with their Charger, or Ford with their Taurus models!!!

[Todd Boyer]

Originally Posted by Scott Bechler

In that case, the first generation of compact Darts ('63-66) were not deserving of the name either. '63 top engine 225 - 145 gross horsepower or about 115 by today's net ratings. '64 273 - 180 gross hp. '65 273 4bbl - 235 gross hp.

Remeber "Dart" has always meant economy car. 184 net hp for the new 2.4L is pretty good for an economy car. Now if they decide to make a turbo version of the 2.4 in the future, 275-300 hp stock is a real possibility. With much more power with the "turn of a screw" as people like to tell Art.

I do hate the fact that it is a foreign chassis with the Dart name.

At least the early '60s Darts were cool (in their own way - Exner cool ???) and didn't look like every other economy car on the road. They shoulda called this new thing something other than Dart.