Why? Why in the world would Chrysler release another gas-guzzling SUV into the domestic market? OK, sure, they probably pulled the trigger on the Aspen before gas crested three bucks a gallon and immolated SUV sales. But why bother? The official website proclaims the Aspen offers “Decadence without shame.” This from a vehicle that gets [an entirely theoretical] 14 mpg in the urban cycle? Whose shame are they referring to? Surely someone should be embarrassed.
I was, driving the thing. I mean, this could be the only vehicle capable of making the Durango’s ungainly, truncated snout seem svelte and perfectly proportioned. Honestly, the Aspen’s short, flat, striated schnoz rivals Cyrano de Bergerac’s proboscis for impure, adulterated hideousness. The protruding front bumper, a throwback to the bad old days when safety equipment was literally tacked on, adds aesthetic insult to non-injury. As for the rest of the design, again, it’s a Durango. How great is that?
Inside, oy. We’ve been sounding the alarm over the proliferation of DCX’ generic cabins for a while now, wondering why so many of their distinctive-looking vehicles are virtually indistinguishable from the pilot’s position. The addition of some light colored wood, model airplane quality silver plastic and a cute little analogue clock to Chrysler’s identikit interior does nothing to lift this “luxury” ute into the luxury category. The column shifter, mouse fur headliner and poorly attached, revolting carpet do much to lower it into econobox territory. For a $30k – $40k product, the lack of tactile satisfaction and overall attention to detail is stunning.
Fold the second row seat forward and the nasty looking sharp-edged seat mechanism– complete with tire jack– stands ready to rip your shins to pieces. Press the cargo bay’s side panel and the entire flimsy plastic piece bows seriously inwards. The rear cargo hatch flies open, and then glides the final leg of its journey. Speaking of leg room, while we can dismiss the third row’s Geneva Convention defying limb constriction as par for the course, how can you justify a second row that requires a 5’10” driver to slide forward? Towing capacity?
Hey, it’s true: the Aspen provides best in class towing: 8950 pounds. That’s provided you buy the Hemi (an extra grand), a 3.92 rear end and stick with a 4X2 transmission– which would still make the Aspen a poor choice for anyone trying to pull a tree off a road so his ex-girlfriend and her new squeeze can get through. Anyway, our tester came with said 5.7-liter hemispherically combustion chambered V8, which should have provided an excuse– however shameful– to buy this rig. I mean, if you’re going to burn fossil fuel like someone who hangs around video gas pumps just for fun, your SUV might as well go like stink.
That it doesn’t. Our tester’s Hemi may have been greener than Kermit the Frog, but I bet the cloth covered amphibian is quicker off the line. Car and Driver clocked the Aspen’s zero to sixty sprint at an impressive 7.2 seconds. We couldn’t get near that figure. More importantly, the Aspen's 335-horse, 370 foot-pounding Hemi only responds to a whip hand; there’s none of that anywhere, anytime thrust that makes the similarly engined 300C such a pleasure to drive. I suppose you need a jet engine to fully motivate a 5400 pound truck, but again, low mileage should equal massive thrust.
By tying down the SUV’s independent front, live axle rear suspension tighter than a gnat’s sphincter, Chrysler engineers managed to get a gi-normous body-on-frame truck with 20” wheels to stay level through the twisties. The downside to this technological feat: the ride quality is best described as “muffled discomfort” and the lack of body lean tempts you to drive this monster faster than you should. Good thing the seats offer no lateral support, the rack and pinion steering provides no useful feedback, the A-pillars cut off any practical view through a bend and the Aspen’s anchors are powerful and easily modulated. The stoppers are more than capable of saving your bacon the first (and presumably only) time you overcook it.
So what, dear friends, is the point of the Aspen? Don’t tell me (Steve Siler) that Chrysler dealers were clamoring for a vehicle more macho than a Pacifica, ‘cause the Aspen is about as macho as William Shatner’s truss. Nor will I accept the argument that this, this, “thing” is Chrysler’s Escalade. Even people with bad taste have better taste than that, and it ain’t nowhere near big enough for the Brothas. No, the only reason I can see for the Aspen’s existence is that someone in marketing said it would be cheap to build a Durango derivative for Chrysler. That’ll teach the suits not to do too much blow the next time they're minging at a Colorado ski resort.
115 Comments on “Chysler Aspen Limited Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Just because something CAN be done, doesn’t mean it should be. This is a good example of that. Incidently the Durango rear seat has been a violator of the Geneva Convention since its’ introduction. I think my 124 Spyder had more leg room in the back.
So, did you like it or not?
Its not often that I cannot find ANYthing to like about a vehicle but I must tip my hat to DCX here and congratulate them on offering a vehicle that manages to muster exactly zero interest from me here.
ON the other hand, Only Farago could get me to click on a review of said vehicle. Now THAT is a compliment! Huzzah!
Dear Chrysler,
You showed up to the party:
Hours too late.
Wearing too much chrome.
Everyone can see you’re just another lame truck.
Even your name says ’80’s.
You’ve got beef, but everyone knows your shortcomings.
The “cool people” have already exited the building.
You should have put this money into an update for another section of your wardrobe, like a meaningful update of the PT Cruiser.
Here’s a question for you Robert:
Is there ever a good case for badge engineering?
I think it’s hard for us automotive enthusiasts to see the world through the eyes of the consumer who this kind of thing works on… while we look at this Aspen and see nothing but a Durango in Sheep’s clothing, there must be a group of car buyers out there that see this as an all new Chrysler product… or maybe just having a different ‘named’ car from their neighbor/sister/whoever already has a Durango is enough for some people. I don’t get it…. But clearly this badge engineering is good for somebody because car manufacturers keep doing it.
meaningful update of the PT Cruiser??? I thought that’s what the Caliber was… or should have been, I guess…
Why does a manufacturer need two small “crossover” style vehicles? One with retro styling and the other with… um… would you call that mad max apocalyptic styling?
If you ask me the PT cruiser should have died the day the Caliber hit dealer lots… judging from how cheaply you can pick up a very slightly used PTs these days, I’d say it did… noone bothered to inform DCX, though.
It’s slow, heavy, and gets bad gas mileage. How is it different than other trucks that can tow 9,000 lbs?
I think the American consumer is finally catching on to Badge Engineering in the crudest sense (Escape/Mariner, Durango/Aspen). It’s just that Detroit doesn’t get it yet.
On the other hand, how much of the general buying public would guess that Civic, CRX, Element and the small Acura share lots of improtant bits.
“Detroit” is a French word meaning “Day Late and a Dollar Short”.
Hey, BimmerHead, I agree somewhat with your comment
“I don’t get it…. But clearly this badge engineering is good for somebody because car manufacturers keep doing it.”
But I can tell you the reason they do it. They’re STUPID.
The most successful car company on earth, Toyota, don’t do it (well, okay I guess they do kind-of with the Pontiac Matrix, but that is a contractual exception with a 50/50 JV, NUUMI).
More to your liking, let me point out that unlike M-B and Chrysler, BMW DO NOT badge-engineer older versions of their vehicles and sell them “cheap(er)”.
Can you imagine a new, reskinned 10 year old BMW sold for 50% less, as a “Glas” ? Glas was a none too successful German car company that BMW purchased (in order to get the extra plant capacity to eventually build the 5-series cars).
Not coincidentally, BMW (which does not use their Glas name, which surely they still own the rights to) are one of the more successful and profitable automobile companies.
Components sharing is one thing. Just badge-engineering or using cast-offs (like the Chrysler Crossfire) is pathetic.
The car companies with bean-counters in charge do it because – well, they can.
Shame on you, DCX management, for not halting this project.
Badge-engineering is done because it generates incremental additional sales and because it is financially cheap in the short run. It is disastrous in the long run, as all of the Japanese companies are aware, and at least some of the Germans (the VW group has shown signs of veering into badge-engineering at times, but mostly avoids it in favor of platform/component sharing).
Oh, and in some cases, because ‘the dealers need something to sell!’ — GM’s perennial problem. And Mercury/Lincoln’s. Is the Dodge dealer network still separate from the Chrysler one?
Bimmer,
I think the Cruiser and Caliber appeal to two completely different demographics/market segments.
Introducing the Caliber, though, does give Chrysler another head-scratching opportunity to compete with themselves at some level. Thus, we also have the Compass and Patriot.
Failure to update the Cruiser (beyond minor tweaks) is another example of the 2.5’s inability to keep a good thing going through updating a successful product. The Corolla’s been around, what, 35 years? The Civic about the same? But, they still get generational updates every 3-4 years without straying from their initial purpose.
Badge engineering, instead, is too tempting.
What is the difference between “badge engineering” and platform sharing? Looks as if all of the sheet metal is different than the Durango… it’s not like it’s the old Plymouth and Dodge Neon.
Toyota does do it… The Camry shares platforms with the Avalon, Solara, Lexus ES and Lexus RX. Are they “badge engineered”?
The “Detroit Disease”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15004014/
Long story short, 70% of Dodge/Chrysler’s portfolio are trucks and SUVs.
Sid -
I don’t have a problem with bit sharing.. or even platform/chassis sharing… but when two cars share 95+% of their parts, I don’t really see the point… even if it’s cheap to do.
Glenn –
I presume you are talking about the Chrysler 300 (and all the other variants)’s use of former generation MB suspension pieces? This, I think, is actually OK. At least it makes an american car drive and ride more like a german car, even if it is a previous design german car. The previous design german car still drives better than any other American car I have driven (not that I have driven many).
It does not bother me to know that a Chrysler 300 and a Dodge Hemi Wagon thing have the same under pinnings… they alter the rest of the design significantly enough that it is a different car… had they mearly changed the badges and put hideous woodgrain in the interior, that is when my panties end up in a wad.
joe C
I think, based again on the used market prices of PTs, everyone who wants a PT has one… and maybe a spare… Updating a retro design is difficult… Ford somehow did it with the mustang, but I don’t see the same working for the PT cruiser.
“Its not often that I cannot find ANYthing to like about a vehicle but I must tip my hat to DCX here and congratulate them on offering a vehicle that manages to muster exactly zero interest from me here.”
0 interest indeed… for 72 month!
Sorry, I could not resist.
“but again, I reckon low mileage should equal massive thrust.”
Not really, it’s the other way around: heavy monster truck = low mileage, thrust is a function of weight and final torque (i.e. crank torque multiplied by the gearbox and final).
This thing is 50% heavier than a 300C, should be 50% slower.
C&D probably clocked theirs in a freefall to 60.
The commercials for this really make me want to buy it. As an incredibly business man, I will purchase an Aspen and drive through the neighborhood I grew up in to demonstrate my success via a badge-engineered boring SUV.
DCX- why not save your money?
What’s this thing’s competition the Aviator?
Isn’t this kind of badge-engineering driven by the extended dealer networks? IOW if DCX is selling x thousand Durangos, then the Chrysler dealer says “hey, I want some of those sales, too.”
They did it back in the 70’s when the SUV craze was only beginning. The Dodge Ramcharger became the Plymouth Trailduster. All they bothered to change were the nameplates. They never did come out with a Chrysler version, but maybe that’s because there were no Linconln or Cadillac SUVs back then either.
Is the experience/perception distinction between visiting a Dodge dealer for a Durango and a Chrysler dealer for an Aspen as wide as it is between visiting a Toyota dealer for a Camry and a Lexus dealer for an ES 350?
I think that’s where one of the lines gets drawn between platform sharing and badge engineering.
I love this article… it is the exact reason why I just dont get American car companies or their products. Why make yet another of the same vehicle which doesnt offer anything particularly unique or desireable. What is the point? Redundancy for the sake of redundancy for the sake of production capacity utilization and expansion of brand lines?
Platform sharing can yield sibblings with different talents and niche appeal. VW does this very well… Conversely badge engineering yields things like that Caddilac cimmaron (SP?) which are so closely related to their bretheren that it takes a parent to tell em apart.
You want the best example of platform sharing… VW/Aud/Seat/Skoda A-platform… There are probably a dozen or more variations on the same platform. VW has the Golf 2 door, 4 door, variant *wagon*, jetta sedan & variant, new Beetle 2 door & convertible. Audi the TT, A3 2&4 door. That leaves Seat & Skoda for which I’m not an expert but I know both have A platform cars. You would never know that the TT is very simmilar to a Skoda or Seat by looking at it from 5 feet away. When was the last time you thought a Jetta wagon looked remarkably like a new beetle convertible? I should note that VW sells some of these cars in markets without others. The Jetta variant is not sold along side the Golf variant… only difference is the windshield forward bodywork… swappable too.
Depending on where in the world you are you may have a combination of A platform cars avaialble. In Spain the Seat may be the favorite vs say in Germany the VW Golf. Various countries get unique combinations of brands and products. If you put them all side by side there is overlap but by how they are marketed and where they are marketed there is less much less overlap.
The latest example of VW platform sharing is the R8… based on the Gallardo but the two cars are very different on both the inside and outside. Between the door skin and sheet metal, the hood(trunk) and the belly pan… is the area where the cars share parts & engineering.
Maybe its not so glaringly horrible to have two very simmilar vehicles in production simultaneously if they are both pleasing and serve unique purposes… but I dont think there is a whole lot of differentiation between the Aspen and the Durango. A co-worker has that same dash design in his Ram 1500 pickup… and he’s got the wood trim & plastics harder than a hockey puck WTF?
Call me an old guy if you must,I prefer body on frame in a SUV.I don’t think its the smartest vehicle for todays market,but an SUV that is a real truck and not the size of an oil tanker does have a market.
G.M. says there is no buyers for mid size SUVs.Mopar has a diferent view.
I can see a lot of these babies selling to us old guys.
Does it not offend anybody that the most pofitable vehicles on the road have some of the worst interior quality? I’m generalizing about SUVs of course but still… When did rubbermaid become a competitor of Faurecia formerly Bertrand Faure… folks that make VW/Audi’s inteiors.
Blow molded plastics harder than a hockey puck in a $40k vehicle which hands a profit back to mfg is just plain old being mean to the customer… fair enough maybe the customer doesnt know any better and its just not required anymore… at least till that customer drives something with a competent interior. Its only the part of the car the driver is in contact with more than anything else.
qfrog: See the comments under my Ford F150 King Ranch review, but Americans seem to give crappy truck and SUV interiors a pass, because…. they can haul dirt.
What’s with the name ?
I remember the Dodge Aspen as the 1976 vehicle of choice for degenerate high school teachers and slipshod golf pros.
How can you possible announce that you’re driving an Aspen at a cocktail party?
Hahahahaha:
“Good thing the seats offer no lateral support, the rack and pinion steering provides no useful feedback, the A-pillars cut off any practical view through a bend and the Aspen’s anchors are powerful and easily modulated.”
Jon.
AH right the dirt hauler interior quality exemption.
But does the average Aspen buyer have topsoil hauling in mind or are they more of a mulch connisseur (sp?) transporting only the finest in landscaping stuffs for their suburban palace.
Yeah, I had an Aspen. IN 1978!!! It had a slant 6 with no power steering. It had that huge 3-spoke Duster steering wheel that would threaten to break your fingers when it snapped back.
Just those memories would never allow me spend 40k on a new one. I saw the infomercial about it on that new channel that has new car previews last night and it was ridiculous.
1984 asks, “What is the difference between “badge engineering†and platform sharing?
Platform sharing is just that, platform sharing. Chassis and drivetrain, nothing else (typically).
Badge engineering means taking an existing product, say the Dodge Durango or Ford Fusion, changing the grille and other minor cosmetic changes, and slapping a Chrysler or Mercury badge on the vehicle.
qfrog brought up the VW A-platform, which is the most widely used platform in the world. CAR magazine pointed out that it is used in 16! models across four VAG brands: Skoda, SEAT, Audi and VW.
Two words that sum up all you need to know about the evils of badge engineering – Cadillac Cimarron.
qfrog: Of course not, but we’re about six to seven minutes away from some commenting, “yeah but you could tow a boat!”
So?
I’m looking at you, Sajeev.
“[T]his could be the only vehicle capable of making the Durango’s ungainly, truncated snout seem svelte and perfectly proportioned.” – Farago
What?! Have you already forgotten the Uplander?
Fair dinkum.
“Chrysler Aspen. The Plymouth Volare of SUV’s”.
“Sales of the Dodge Durango midsize SUV have dropped off precipitously,” so WHY introduce a clone now??
They’re saying DCX has caught “Detroit disease.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15004014/
“Chrysler Aspen. The Plymouth Volare of SUV’sâ€.
I’d say “the Dodge Aspen of SUVs.”
Meet the new… short bus!!!
(Did I really say that?)
Is it okay if I chuckle a bit when these things pass me, or me them, and they are getting 1/2 the gas mileage than I am in an incredibly fun car that was less expensive (subaru legacy spec-b)?
Lucky you, that’s a fun car. Weird clutch pedal though.
JimHinCO: but what if you have to… haul a boat?
What then?!?
Jonny,
No problem: Subaru owners only own kayaks and canoes.
I’m kidding!
JimHinCO – sure you can, but Barbie won’t notice. She’ll be on her phone, making a tanning room appointment.
Every car company “badge engineers”
I’m not sure you can find a company with more than 2 brands without a car or truck that just did not modify the front and rear sheet metal on the same car.
However it does not make any sense that both vehicles should have the same available options.
Joe C:
The Corolla’s been around, what, 35 years? The Civic about the same? But, they still get generational updates every 3-4 years without straying from their initial purpose.
The Corolla from as late as the early ’80s (I had a ‘77, which weighed less than 2000 lbs) was the same size as today’s Yaris. Nonetheless, the model name always meant quality, even if they grew it. So I’m quibbling.
My favorite part of the review was the comparison to Cyrano de Bergerac’s nose.
Martin Albright:
“Chrysler Aspen. The Plymouth Volare of SUV’sâ€.
I’d say “the Dodge Aspen of SUVs.â€
Same dif. (My parents had the Volare. POS.)
Thanks for the fun replies. :) I feel very lucky to have a spec-b.
I figure I can use my truck to haul the horses, boats, flat-bed for when friends move (and they all remember me during those times!), etc.
For a daily driver, I just can’t imagine a huge gas-gussler…if I had one more garage door bay, then as a weekender, it’d be great.
Off topic: Has anyone developed a way to push text messages via lights/laser onto your rear window? I’d love to flash a “Please get off of the cell phone” or “Your turn signals appear to be burnt out when you change lanes” messages.
Many really cute and funny jabs at the Aspen. Made me chuckle.
Luckily for Chrysler, not all consumers are pistonheads. Luckily for Chrysler, not all consumers are car experts like the readers of TTAC.
At the end of the day, some people, including myself, like the look of this SUV.
Now that gas prices are dropping, don’t be surprised if they sell a fair amount of these vehicles.
Okay everybody, you can now slam me.
Jim…. at a risk of running aground on off topic island I must post the following to help you share the love… I’m from Jersey and not affraid to communicate in the native signing.
http://www.roadrage.com/
Shabster — Slam!
Some here have said they can’t understand why Chrysler would create such a thing. Well I do: they had to develop a direct competitor to the Olds Bravada and Buick Ranier!
Have a nice day.