By on March 24, 2008

dg008_004du.jpgI drink Espolon tequila. It's not a matter of taste, smoothness or snobbery. Veteran drinkers– like car buyers– know it's always better to buy top shelf hooch to minimize the inevitable after-effects. Get drunk on the cheap and you pay the price (the old "I have to get better so I can die" routine). By the same token, buy a Dodge Durango and it will burn all the way down to the pit of your automotive soul, leaving you with a hangover that will last years. Where's the fun in that?

The Dodge Boys freshened the Durango for the 2008 model year. The SUV displays Chrysler's new "corporate look," shared with the Journey and Caravan. The snout loses the pronounced grills that towered over the Durango's headlights. Instead, the designers injected a shot of botox into the SUVs eyebrows, giving the Durango a slightly surprised look from the front. Meanwhile, the bumper got a shot of collagen, adding droopy-lipped, Angelina Jolie-wannabe flair.

The rest of the Durango's sheetmetal is androgynous, blending in perfectly with the growing "no there there" sub-developments strewn across the U.S. The only interesting bit comes at the rear, where the Durango's taillights look like a quad-pair of B-1 Bomber afterburners. It's a cool touch on an otherwise completely forgettable exterior.

dg008_003du.jpgGrab the oversized chrome door handles, feel them jiggle a bit and yank. The Durango's door pops open like an old can of Pringles, complete with stale sour cream and onion smell. Hard shiny plastic assaults your vision in every direction. The center stack is covered in a shiny "wood" that looks more ersatz than Contact brand shelf paper. The salesman said Chrysler had to use craptastic plastic to keep the costs down, so Chrysler could continue to build the Durango in the U.S. Let me say this about that: they're closing the plant in 2009.

The Durango's chairs are strangely narrow for its target market. The Limited's window sticker claims they're covered in "real leather." Who knew? Thank Lord Xenu for the designers putting micro-fiber suede inserts into the seats to keep the erstwhile cow hide from consuming everything like kudzu.

On the positive side, I discovered several clever and useful details. Flip the cheap second row of seats forward to reveal the cheap-but-useful-for-two-adults third row. The climate control proved extremely powerful, despite the fact that the salesman needed five minutes to figure it out.

The Durango Limited comes with a 335hp, 5.7-liter HEMI engine. Mashing the gas brings to mind the running of the bulls in Pamplona. Thanks to a rubbery suspension, the 4900lbs. truck bucks like an enraged bovine. And then there's the screaming, as the panicked Durango driver saws at an anesthetized helm trying to avoid solid objects.

dg008_001du.jpgStill, once you acclimatize yourself to the feather-light helm, interstate merging and two-lane blacktop overtaking are a breeze. The five-speed automatic always seems to find the right ratio, and lets the HEMI power away, with only a hint of road noise and cooling fan roar penetrating the stout door seals.

It would be nice to dismiss the Durango's horrific ride quality as a byproduct of the SUVs' massive towing ability (8500lbs). But I can't. The Durango's heavy-duty shocks and dampers recall the 1970's era Wagoneer; the more recent Chrysler product creaks, groans, and shimmies over nearly everything save smooth Chrysler Proving Ground roads.

Abrupt maneuvers upset the chassis more than Simon Cowell on American Idol. Piloting a Durango in anything other than a straight line, you're always aware of that the vehicle's mass has a mind of its own. That's provided there isn't any aerodynamic disturbance; during crosswinds, the Durango's nose wanders across lanes without much warning.

Sensibly enough (considering America's litigious nature), Dodge built the Durango with full-on safety equipment. All Durangos possess more airbags than a stuntman convention, Electronic Stability Protection (ESP), anti-lock brakes and dual-note electric horns (to remind small cars to get out of the way). The dealer told me ESP senses when the Durango is rolling, and then locks-up a wheel to slam the truck back on the pavement. Film at 11.

dg008_002du.jpgDriving the Dodge Durango is enough to drive an American car/truck lover to drink. To see such a mediocre and pitiful product coming from a company that's built some of the most quintessentially American cars breaks my heart and tears at my soul. With a fresher exterior re-freshening, a better interior, some chassis development and a smidgen of steering feel, the Durango could have become a great truck– instead of a dodgy, uninspired, characterless hulk.

Clearly, the beancounters at Chrysler don't have the time, inclination or cash to refine the Durango into a top shelf product. And so it remains the six buck bottle of Cuervo of SUVs.  

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

51 Comments on “2008 Dodge Durango Limited Review...”


  • avatar
    GS650G

    Proudly built in Newark Delaware, for now. This is the same plant that gave us Fury, K cars, Valiants, and the impressive Cordoba.

    Gas heading for 4 dollars a gallon, this model is toast. No one cares that it has a hemi, they probably wish it had a 318 instead.

  • avatar
    thetopdog

    This thing is so ugly. It’s a shame too, since the original Durango was one of the best looking SUVs of its day. Same with the Dodge Dakota, they completely ruined the styling of both

  • avatar

    They had a Power Wagon concept that was strongly received. Watered down, that concept yielded the 2004 Durango, where the bulging bodysides simply appeared bland and bloated rather than retro.

    The 2008 refresh deprives the 2004 of its only distinctive aspect, the Ram-lite front end.

    That said, back in 2003 I found the ride and handling about the best of any large SUV. But much of the competition has vastly improved since then, while Dodge has (at best) remained in place.

    The one thing that does remain appealing about the Durango: it has the length of a full-size SUV, but not the width. So it doesn’t feel as bulky.

    No reliability info on this one yet at TrueDelta, but working on it.

    http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php

  • avatar
    Zarba

    The Durango is a posterr child of Detriot’s wrong-headed thinking. Poor build quality, crap interior, too narrow to be comfortable, and a gas hog to boot.

    The nose, whil improved from the anteater-like droopy abomination that it was before, is still ugly.

    A live axle with leaf springs? In 2008? Ummm, no.

    And while the Hemi at least allows you to outrun the masses laughing at the horrible styling, it sucks gas at a rate that is simply unacceptable in this day of $3.25/gal gas. 19 on the highway? Downhill with a tailwind?

    Why this truck doesn’t have a turbo-diesel is beyond me.

    They can’t kill this soon enough. The Durango will live forever in the Aspen Hell of bad Chryslers.

  • avatar
    NICKNICK

    Just a quick aside–I recommend Milagro Reposado (haven’t tried their silver or anejo yet). At $30 a bottle, it’s no bargain, but as a matter of taste it’s just as good as $50/bottle Don Julio. And as a matter of practicality, it’s never done me wrong the day after.

    Back on point–The Durango is like the rest of Detroit’s autos: overpriced by a factor of 3 or 4. I can’t fathom paying over $30K for this vehicle. Sell it new for $10K and I’ll consider it. Maybe the American Axle strike will be the beginning of the end of $28/hour assembly jobs. If detroit gets it down to $8/hour, maybe they can price their vehicles properly. I won’t touch a $20K Malibu, but sell it for $8K and I’m in.

  • avatar
    RayH

    I agree with topdog, the original Durango looked good, butch but not a butch-box.
    A friend of mine had a 4×4 with either the 5.2 or 5.9 in 1999 and was happy getting 20-22 on the highway. He bought a new one in 2004 with the 4.7 v8 and has never gotten over 15, and he says the mpgs have actually been doing down since day 1 despite adding low resistance tires, multiple alignments, overpressurizing the tire, and deleading his foot.
    I haven’t noticed this body style on the road yet… I hope it’s my lack of observation rather than sales.

  • avatar
    bfg9k

    The rest of the Durango’s sheetmetal is androgynous, blending in perfectly with the growing “no there there” sub-developments strewn across the U.S.

    With the collapse of easy mortgage credit and rising gas prices, I would re-phrase this as the “recently growing” sub-developments…

    The original Durango seems to have been very popular. About a year after the hulking 2nd gen came out the Durango seemingly disappeared from MA roads. I presume that the buyers of the originals leased them and were not not interested in repeating the experience a second time ’round.

  • avatar
    Wulv

    Another thing the US gets that Canada doesn’t, good Tequila. :) Unless you want to pay $98 for a bottle of Don Julio or Cabo Wabo, you get basically Jose Cuervo Gold GAH!. I usually pick up a bottle of Casadores at the duty free on the way home after a weekend in the US.

    Every time I look at the new(er) Durango’s, all that comes to mind is what looks like a MASSIVE size increase over the original from the 90′s. Talk about super sizing your vehicle. I believe the Wheelbase got shorter, but height and width seem to have ballooned. Then again, I do not see many on the roads, let alone side by side, so I could be wrong.

  • avatar
    pb35

    I loved the original Durango. It was a great truck at the time. Now, not so much.

    Check out this price list of Tequilas; which one do you think is the cheapest?

    http://www.royal-liquors.com/spirits_tequila1.html

  • avatar
    NICKNICK

    As of right now, 698 views, just 9 comments.

    That sounds about right for gauging interest in this vehicle.

  • avatar

    NICKNICK,

    And a lot of them are discussing the tequila instead of the truck…

  • avatar
    TriShield

    News has come out that Chrysler is going to cull it’s SUV herd by half.

    Hopefully the Durango (and it’s twin) will be among them.

    Otherwise it needs an appealing redesign, STAT.

  • avatar
    Buick61

    It was refreshed for the 2007 Model Year, not 2008.

  • avatar
    BEAT

    Nice review.

    This truck is the most hated in America.

    You rather buy this One http://evoxtuners.com/evo-x-headline-news/219-mitsubishis-evo-x-now-fq360-flavour.html

  • avatar
    dastanley

    The best protest against a POS vehicle, like the latest Durango, is to not buy it. That sounds so obvious, but…

    I have a neighbor that bought a 2005 Yukon that was the epitome of a POS. Everything that could have gone wrong with it DID go wrong with it. He spent practically every weekend at the Chevy/GMC dealer trying to get some new and/or existing problem fixed. And yet after all that, he went out and got another Yukon. “Maybe THIS one will be better.” I just don’t get it.

  • avatar
    coupdetat

    I will never understand the shape and stance of this SUV. It actually looks like a stegasaurus about to eat some trees.

    I can honestly say that this car would scare me if it was in my driveway.

    What’s with all the reviews of POS cars lately anyways?

  • avatar
    Bancho

    Zarba :
    “too narrow to be comfortable, and a gas hog to boot.”

    I’m no fan of the Durango but that comment baffled me. I’ve got a coworker who has one and it seems plenty wide (inside) for a its class. Can you elaborate?

    For my personal taste, it’s just massive and aesthetically hideous.

  • avatar

    Bancho,

    Despite being pretty wide, the seats themselves are very narrow. I’m in very good shape, so when I say the side bolsters dig into my thighs, its not because I indulge myself at the Cheesecake Factory very often.

    Why Chrysler put such narrow seats on such a large vehicle really baffled me… maybe narrower seats reduce cost?

  • avatar
    Bancho

    Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.

  • avatar
    keepaustinweird

    TWAT-worthy

  • avatar
    Point Given

    Just like the dodge truck, wobbly as all heck while driving. Another doomed product.

  • avatar
    Turbo G

    This is more like the Viva Villa agave based product sold in a plastic gallon sized jug than even the Curevo Gold as suggested. Large packaging for cheap with no substance. It seems its what’s on the inside that wrecks all of the Chryler products.

  • avatar
    blautens

    You didn’t mention it, but among other things, it seems like there isn’t nearly enough leg room in the rear (not third row) seat of my colleagues 2007 model. While it’s not the only domestic SUV to suffer that fate, it seems shameful when you consider the length of the beast.

  • avatar
    Zarba

    Bancho:

    I was using the reviewer’s description of the interior. As an aside, the 2nd gen has always looked narrow to me; it could be the proportions make it appear that way.

    I’ve never ridden in the 2nd-gen Rango. I rode in the original, and that was bad enough. I felt like I nneded to chack and make sure there really were springs and shocks under it, it rode so poorly.

    And at $37,800, no wonder they can’t sell them. I know the actual street price is far lower, but I can’t see how anyone could drive a Honda Pilot and still spend $5K more for this POS. Even at an equivalent street price, it’s no contest.

  • avatar
    Bancho

    Zarba :
    It’s all good. Mike Solowiow straightened me out ;)

    I agree though, for the price this thing stickers at there are much better choices out there.

  • avatar
    sashazur

    At least it looks better than the Nitro.

  • avatar
    Jim H

    Great write-up…sometimes I wonder perhaps these cars are appealing to anyone and everyone who has never been inside a better vehicle? For example, I thought Yellow Tail wine was awesome…until I started trying better stuff (some of which wasn’t even more expensive or that much more expensive).

    Today gas was $3.25 and deisel was over $4/gallon. These might be great second vehicles or weekend vehicles…but day to day they just don’t seem practical unless you want to live off the dollar menu at various fast food places…which means you’ll be swapping out those narrow seats rather quickly. :)

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    The things they tell people!! My grandmother’s recent Pathfinder purchase had her under the impression that her factory alarm would send 12V of power through the keyhole to elecrocute lockpickers, and that her standard stability control (which was neither standard on her year model, nor actually on her vehicle…) would act “like an AWD system,” just without the AWD part.

    Fortunately, she isn’t an idiot and refused to beleive that her car was lock-pick-proof, or that by braking all of her wheels, albeit in an intelligent, controlling way, her car was capable of 4×4-like off-roading (or AWD-like on-roading).

    Then again, this is the same dealership that sold her a new 2.5L V6 Altima..

    (unfortunately, she didn’t pop the hood to check on that one… or read any of her paperwork..)

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    I would buy this Durango IF:

    a] gas was $0.50/gal
    b] No other new or used vehicles were sold, except for the Durango.

  • avatar

    Whenever I go to the US (about half the year) I go to the heart of Bush country. God-fearing patriots who define themselves by ‘how big is it?’. That includes their weight, their food and their cars. A Miata or a mini is as rare as an Obama bumper sticker.

    So, this Durango, would have been perfect for this town. Lots of second generation Durangos parked next to the Navigators, Escalades and Yukons that fill the Walmart parking lot (and filled it is). I say would, what kills this, and why all the aforementioned SUV’s are driving around with “for sale” signs, is the price of gas. It’s 75 miles to the next po-dunk town, which means about a $40 round trip. If you commute to the town, as many do, then goodbye SUV, hello Dodge Caravan (built in the USA by god)

    Where does this leave the Dodgy Durango? A heavily discounted, one year model.

  • avatar

    Rented one of these last month for a run from Bozeman to Billings, MT, a 200 mile high speed roll on interslab.

    OW. I’ve never driven the old one but this thing was bad. I spent the week prior riding around in a last gen crew cab Toyota pickup, and it was a far fall. My wife was entertained by the fully plastic interior, but less so by wind noise off the mirrors she compared to leaving the window open. We didn’t hate the design at all, but the execution was the issue. Spend a twenty here, please.

    I was busy dealing with a chassis that defied description. Shocks already dead at 14k-an unacceptable wandering at high speed. This was not like the time the rental gods tossed me an FX35-now that was fun in Montana. The durango was pointed at 75, as that’s as fast as we could go and stay in high gear. Got thirteen MPG.

    You need the hemi. the 4.7 is a throwback to the emission control engines of the eighties.

    The level of vibration in the body was also not acceptable. Flex between door and A pillar was constant.

    There is an overall feel that each part has been made as cheaply as possible. The fittings as well as the interiors. It’s more than usual, even for chryco. I don’t know how anyone would buy this if they drove anything else. The Toyota was quiet and rock solid. The v8 made lotsa torque with none of the boom the durango felt necessary.

    We rode back from the airport in a 08 MDX. Felt like a BMW in comparison.

    The cerebus financial managers clearly sent out a memo, and the suppliers understood it. No shocks at 14 k !?

  • avatar
    davey49

    Absolute wrong audience for this vehicle. SUVs shouldn’t be reviewed by “car enthusiasts”.
    take the Durango to a boat show and it would be appreciated.

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    In today’s day and age, spending 30K on ANY car should get you at least on-par quality, regardless of the vehicle’s intention. Also, take a good look at the interior of a “modern” SUV, including this pile, and compare it to your typical minivan. While looking at said comparison, make a mental note of how many parts and functions are similar. So, no, davey, this isn’t the wrong audience. This vehicle isn’t sold with a fishing hat or a trailer.

    Besides, think for a second about true car enthusiasts. While this encompasses a lot of folk, one interesting enthusiast is the one who tows his track car and/or classic.. do these “car enthusiasts” not deserve quality vehicles that get decent gas mileage and don’t fall apart at the same rate of it’s depreciation?

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    P.S. I don’t see anywhere on here where Mike Solowiow tried to compare this to a car. Expecting a street-legal vehicle of any class to handle at a realistic level isn’t enthusiast material – the enthusiast is looking for a car that exceeds expectations. This review clearly shows how poorly this vehicle meets expectations, and nowhere does it condemn the vehicle for not exceeding said expectations, only for lacking in said department.

  • avatar

    where the hell can I get a $6 bottle of Cuervo ?

  • avatar

    @ cretinx,

    You can get $6 Cuervo at the Class Six on base. You just have to be a member of the military (or a contractor)… but at $6, I still say no, maybe its because I’m Mexican (well… New Mexican)

  • avatar
    jmrnyc

    I think these sold to people who had to tow large trailers of liquor. Seems to me that was the only saving grace; tow capacity.

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    Davey49: “Absolute wrong audience for this vehicle. SUVs shouldn’t be reviewed by “car enthusiasts”. Take the Durango to a boat show and it would be appreciated”

    Why, does the Durango float? Or is it an appealing anchor?

    Anyhow, I liked the review, even if the Tequila references were above my head.

  • avatar
    86er

    Why Chrysler put such narrow seats on such a large vehicle really baffled me… maybe narrower seats reduce cost?

    Maybe, my 2000 Dakota also has narrow seats and it’s pushing me back into the loving arms of a full-size half-ton again.

  • avatar
    davey49

    offroadinfrontier- there’s a difference between handling safely and handling like a sports car.
    The Durango is safe, which is good enough.
    And yes the type of car enthusiast who tows cars to car shows or racing events will likely appreciate the Durango. Especially if they’re Chrysler fans.
    SherbornSean- tow capacity is 8850# with 5.7L and 2wd
    The Durango is also slightly smaller and lighter than the Tahoe/Expedition/Armada/Sequoia

    I’m not quite sure what constitutes “cheap” plastics anyway. I’m not a dash fondler.

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    I don’t think I ever confused handling safely and handling like a sports car. Besides, who in the hell buys an SUV hoping for sports-car characteristics? I have enough faith in the average person to think that most wouldn’t (or at least enough faith in those who aren’t completely naive). Like I said before, nowhere in this article does the author imply that the Durango should handle like a sports car. Nowhere in my posts did I express that it should, either. Try reading my posts again.

    Safe to you apparently means something different than what it does to the reviewer.

    Again, back to the review. A car enthusiast would most likely want an SUV that feels more planted than this ‘en. I’m not saying that it needs to be 2 inches off of the ground and capable of impressive track records, but I’d assume that someone who drives an enthusiast car would appreciate a truck that didn’t feel like this one. Referring back to the article:

    “And then there’s the screaming, as the panicked Durango driver saws at an anesthetized helm trying to avoid solid objects.”

    “It would be nice to dismiss the Durango’s horrific ride quality as a byproduct of the SUVs’ massive towing ability (8500lbs). But I can’t. The Durango’s heavy-duty shocks and dampers recall the 1970′s era Wagoneer; the more recent Chrysler product creaks, groans, and shimmies over nearly everything save smooth Chrysler Proving Ground roads.”

    “during crosswinds, the Durango’s nose wanders across lanes without much warning.”

    No sports car references there. Actually, he compares this hunk to an suv over 30 years old.

  • avatar

    offroadinfrontier,

    You are right. I never expected the Durango to handle like a sports car… at all. I expected it to be stable and have decent feedback so I didn’t feel there was marshmallows inbetween the wheel and the tires. It felt marginally safe, not something I expect in ANY vehicle.

    When I drive an SUV, I review it as an SUV, not a car that will be fun to drive like a Porsche, but how well it satisfies what its intended market was. To say, “The Durango sucked because it didn’t handle like my Porsche” does nothing for the person wanting an honest opinion. I approached the Durango as a person needing room, towing capacity, and some off-road/all weather capability.

    The Durango failed. Compared to the competition, the Durango felt ancient, poorly constructed, and inadequate (except the useful third row, and good towing). With all the alternatives out there the Durango winds up short.

    Davey,

    The Durango felt marginally safe, and even Chrysler fans should seriously evaluate whether or not to purchase this vehicle. And cheap plastics are the hard, shiny kind that resemble cheap toys. The Durango was 90% this stuff. Harsh to the touch, and not put together well. There were also flash seams all over the cabin, where I could tell how the plastic was molded, because Chrysler failed to get the excess plastic off the part before they installed it. Made it feel incredibly cheap.

    P.S. offroadinfrontier… I just drove your truck… Film at 11

  • avatar
    davey49

    Either way I still would recommend the Durango to people looking for this type of vehicle. The tow capacity outweighs the interior materials for me.
    Plus it’s made in the US and I like the way it looks. It’s also been fairly reliable according to CR.

  • avatar
    offroadinfrontier

    I’d suggest an Armada over this, from personal experience. Better towing, MUCH better handling, and it’s made in the great U.S., too.

    ;)

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    I would suggest a Rav4 over this. Same class of car (from what I’ve read).

    On a separate note, I’ve noticed a lot of Aspens around Boston lately. Why?

    Why? why? why? Do these people hate themselves?

  • avatar
    jmrnyc

    “It’s also been fairly reliable according to CR.”

    Not really. It’s been average at best according to CR.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    Average reliability in 2008 is pretty darn reliable, considering it would probably be much better than average 12 years ago. These scores leave quite a bit to be desired as the TrueDelta people will gladly explain. All that said, the Durango may satisfy those who are in the “Mopar or No car” crowd but it is a disappointment to those who cross shop other brands. I just came from the International car show and have noticed that a lot of cost cutting has been taking place in the interiors of vehicles. The Pontiac G8 – hyped by the auto press – was really disappointing in terms of interior quality as was the lower line Camrys. However, the Cadillac CTS sported impressive interior quality as did the Audi lineup.

  • avatar
    mommyof3

    I own a 2006 Durango. I love it. I have owned a Nissan Murano (loved it as well), GMC Envoy (hated it), Hummer H2 (umm no thanks), all within the last 4 yrs. After finding out we were pregnant for the 3rd time, we realized we had to have a 3rd row in order to fit all 3 car seats. After the Envoy & Hummber (with major issues with both) we found the Durango. I admit, the finishes inside are not as nice as a top of the line Sequoia or tahoe, but I think it’s very comparable to other SUV’s. I seat up to 8 people and even my 6’4″ husband can sit in the 3rd row comfortably. Can’t say the same for the Tahoe, Landcruiser, ect. as those 3rd rows sit over the wheel. So the leather isn’t as high quality as a BMW. For 34K, that’s fine with me. I think it still looks good. I love the stereo, sunroof & the entertainment system saves my butt everytime the kids are in the car. I am averaging 17 mpg. I have had absolutely NO problems with it. It has very good pickup and I actually enjoy driving it. It’s a great family car & when I drive by myself, I don’t feel like I’m in a mommy-mobile. It is very easy to get in/out of. All the seats fold down very easily and I love being able to manipulate the seats as I need them. I can easily fold the 3rd row flat, or just one of the middle row seats. I wish the 3rd row is more easily accessible, but it’s not a big deal. Even with the 3rd row up, I still have more cargo room then my friends 2008 tahoe. I admit, her Tahoe is great looking and I love riding in it, but I don’t want to spend 15-20k more for it. I enjoy my Durango for what it is, a large SUV in the lower price range (for all the options that comes with it). It drives like a car, but I could fit enough belongings for a small house in it. I think the interior on the 50k Hummer is not any better then my 34k Durango…or Envoy…or the 4 Runner. If you are looking for an SUV, take a look at a Durango…at least take a look. It does not deserve all the bad comments that is has recieved.

  • avatar
    mommyof3

    Ok, so I read more reviews and had to add to my last comment. My old Hummer was top of the line, but was plastic crap on the inside. The leather was not the greatest. My Envoy & Murano did not have awesome BMW grade leather or inside detail. I just rented a Pathfinder…granted it probably was a low end model..but still, the dashboard plastic was not any nicer then my Durango. The Durango is not a BMW or Mercedes. I was just in the 2008 Tahoe & I will admit that it was nicer on the inside, but it was a top of the line Tahoe, $50k plus. However I sat in the 3rd row and was not exactly comfortable for my 15 min. ride. In the 3rd row of my Durango, you have a great amount of leg/head room. Same with the middle row. The cargo room, even with the 3rd row up is much bigger then a lot of the other SUV’s. Now, it’s been a long time since I was in a Sequoia…and I love the Sequoia, but I don’t want to spend 20K more on a vehicle to have less cargo room, leg room, ect. just to have nicer leather or finishes. If cars could build equity..well then ok, I would. Maybe if I actually kept cars until I paid them off & drove them in the ground, then I probably would go with a Nissan or Toyota. But I am at home with 3 kids and though the Durango isn’t a top of the line SUV, it does bring me enjoyment to drive and leaves me cash in my pocket every month. I do not notice much noise and I think it drives very well. My husband enjoys the pick up and if he thought this was a crappy SUV, we would have traded it in by now. Like I said, it’s not top of the line SUV, but the price reflects that as well. It is absolutely not in the same class as a Rav4. This is bigger then the Tahoe..so I am assuming it is mid/large SUV class. Which is awesome because I don’t have to necessarily take my husbands huge mega cab truck just to cart some thing around…chances are if I fold all the seats down, I can put it in my Durango. I will be looking for a new SUV in less then a year and I am having a hard time figuring out what I will replace this vehicle with.

  • avatar
    50merc

    Golly, theswedishtiger, we Snopses regret that your visits to the US have been such hellish experiences. Please don’t feel obliged to return for our sake.

  • avatar
    ptcruide

    I drive a 2008 Dodge Durango. I don’t know what the fuss is about it, it has been a wonderful vehicle for our family to own. It has 62000 trouble free miles  on it. We have owned many Chrysler products and have never been left on the side of the road besides GM products.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States