Topic: Used Vehicle Review: Dodge Caliber, 2007-2009

[Autos_Editor]

"The Caliber wouldn't be my first choice for a used compact, but it seems to be holding up pretty well through its first few years," says Contributing Editor, Chris Chase.  "The availability of all-wheel drive is a bonus."

Read More...

[purple]

Re CVT transmissions: would these be cheap to repair since they are belt/pulley systems (compared to normal trannies with internal gears, fluid, etc.).  Could a mechanic comment?

[tortoise]

Such a disapppointing effort from Chrysler.  I remember being interested in them when they first came out, probably because it was another hatch on the market.

Then I sat in one at the car show and was completely turned off.   Such a brutal interior.

[chrischasescars]

^^^ Too bad they waited till 2009 to improve the interior.

[aknutson]

Such a disapppointing effort from Chrysler.  I remember being interested in them when they first came out, probably because it was another hatch on the market.

Then I sat in one at the car show and was completely turned off.   Such a brutal interior.

Same feelings here - just a thoroughly disappointing interior, even though it offered a lot of cool cargo management and versatility features. I remember test driving the Caliber in the first 3 months it was introduced. I drove a base model manual, and the car didn't even have a tachometer. On a manual! I guess when the groaning motor got loud enough you'd shift gears. A friend of mine bought one, and with a beige/tan interior it is a little more pleasing than the depressing gray, but it is still wrought with dismal build quality. The reliability of the CVT doesn't scare me one bit, they have many less parts to go wrong than a traditional autobox, but the driving experience is what puts me off. I think the rock-bottom price is what will keep this moving in the used market.

[John MacDonald]

What a complete piece of crap!  Crystler doesn't have a sweet clue how to produce a decent vehicle.  I've drove a number of these crap boxs (through rental companies) and have never once been the least bit impressed.  What they need to do is scrap everything besided the Jeep Wrangler, Dodge Ram, Viper, Dodge Caravan and Challenger (don't like this one either but I know it's a decent seller).  I'm waiting for fiat to bring over the 500 which will at least look good and drive well, but the reliability will forever be a problem for them.  I never even considered taking any of their vehicles out for a test drive for our next vehicle as they are so poor quality I didn't even want to waste my time.  They make GM look like Honda.

[T.W]

The Caliber is typical of NA cars that were made to look butch and SUV like, and failing on both counts.
I too had experience with the Caliber - as a rental of course - and yes the interior quality was brutal to say the least, the rear visibility was a joke, and the handling is definitely tuned for the non enthusiast, but the worst part was the CVT.
The sensation in driving it was like a rubber band, constantly expanding and contracting. The engines racing and the transmission is trying to catch up and I have no say in the matter.
Who buys these things and why?
Have we become that lazy, because I'm seeing more CVT's on the market and getting increasingly alarmed at the lack of choice out there.
Having said that, the hatch had a lot of space, the highway ride wasn't too bad and the resale values quoted in this article are far better then I imagined.
But would I buy it?
God no.

[Schmengie]

We had a remarkably solid and trouble-free '00 Neon for 8 years and I was actually considering the Caliber to replace it. That is, until we had a rental Caliber for a few days. One look at that awful Rubbermaid plastic interior was enough for me. It was worse by an order of magnitude than the Neon's. The iPod holder in the console was so flimsy you could actually see light shining through it. That car rattled like a can of marbles and it had less than 5,000 klicks on it. No thanks.

That said, I see tons of them on the road every day so the car must have been a reasonable success for Chrysler. A few people at work have Calibers and seem happy with them.

[Spec5]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

[Sival]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

It's a matter of programming. The unit may be the same, but a CVT succeeds or fails on the programming since it can be programmed to have any gear at all. CVTs are very good for people who are gradual on the gas pedal, but do act weird if someone treats the gas pedal as an on/off switch.

As to the materials of the Caliber, their main problem is actually not the materials themselves, I mean most compacts have absolutely atrocious materials on their interior. Even the Civic's dash gives a deep hollow sound if you hit it with your knuckles. The Forte's interior is hard plastics all over too, yet no one harped much against it. The problem is the texture that really make it look really cheap especially in light tones. The old Chrysler vehicles had hard plastics too, but they gave it a dark color and gave them leather-like texture so that it didn't look cheap until you knocked on it. In 2010, the Caliber's interior has been modified, but they basically just modified the design a bit, added rubber paint on the hard materials of the dash and a few softer material on contact points, and it makes a lot of difference if not in actual quality, at least in the looks department.

Personally, I'd probable be driving the Caliber if it weren't for one thing: horrible highway fuel economy with the CVT. 7.3 l/100 Km with a 2.0L engine in a compact is unacceptable in this day and age. The city fuel economy is decent, but on the highway, it just plain sucks, old Buick Centuries did just as good and the V6-equipped midsize sedans from Chrysler get similar fuel economy. What gives? The Sentra and Versa get better with their CVTs, why can't the Caliber? I'm not saying it should battle the Yaris, but at least lower 6s l/100 Km is not an unreasonable expectation for an automatic compact with a 2.0L engine, right?

Otherwise, the Caliber is a pretty good value for the money. It really is cheap, especially with the rebates that Chrysler puts on their cars. The engine is decent if a bit loud under acceleration, the car is pretty comfortable for 4 adults, the seating position is relatively high which a lot of people like and it can take quite a bit of cargo, making it a versatile compact. It really is a shame that Chrysler didn't work out the problems of the car, it had a lot of potential.

[Leviathan]

Such a disapppointing effort from Chrysler.  I remember being interested in them when they first came out, probably because it was another hatch on the market.

Then I sat in one at the car show and was completely turned off.   Such a brutal interior.

[john macdonald]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

It's a matter of programming. The unit may be the same, but a CVT succeeds or fails on the programming since it can be programmed to have any gear at all. CVTs are very good for people who are gradual on the gas pedal, but do act weird if someone treats the gas pedal as an on/off switch.

As to the materials of the Caliber, their main problem is actually not the materials themselves, I mean most compacts have absolutely atrocious materials on their interior. Even the Civic's dash gives a deep hollow sound if you hit it with your knuckles. The Forte's interior is hard plastics all over too, yet no one harped much against it. The problem is the texture that really make it look really cheap especially in light tones. The old Chrysler vehicles had hard plastics too, but they gave it a dark color and gave them leather-like texture so that it didn't look cheap until you knocked on it. In 2010, the Caliber's interior has been modified, but they basically just modified the design a bit, added rubber paint on the hard materials of the dash and a few softer material on contact points, and it makes a lot of difference if not in actual quality, at least in the looks department.

Personally, I'd probable be driving the Caliber if it weren't for one thing: horrible highway fuel economy with the CVT. 7.3 l/100 Km with a 2.0L engine in a compact is unacceptable in this day and age. The city fuel economy is decent, but on the highway, it just plain sucks, old Buick Centuries did just as good and the V6-equipped midsize sedans from Chrysler get similar fuel economy. What gives? The Sentra and Versa get better with their CVTs, why can't the Caliber? I'm not saying it should battle the Yaris, but at least lower 6s l/100 Km is not an unreasonable expectation for an automatic compact with a 2.0L engine, right?

Otherwise, the Caliber is a pretty good value for the money. It really is cheap, especially with the rebates that Chrysler puts on their cars. The engine is decent if a bit loud under acceleration, the car is pretty comfortable for 4 adults, the seating position is relatively high which a lot of people like and it can take quite a bit of cargo, making it a versatile compact. It really is a shame that Chrysler didn't work out the problems of the car, it had a lot of potential.

Value for the money, you got to be kidding me right.  For the same price and "deal" you can get the Hyundai Elantra Touring which is 1000X better, with a much better warranty, looks better, has a much better interior, gets better fuel economy, has better auto/manual, and it actually will have a better resale value.  Oh did I mention it handles like a euro vehicle, unlike the Caliber that handles like a horse and buggy.  Only way that Chrystler will get their act together is if we as consumer stop buying that garbage.

[Spec5]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

It's a matter of programming. The unit may be the same, but a CVT succeeds or fails on the programming since it can be programmed to have any gear at all. CVTs are very good for people who are gradual on the gas pedal, but do act weird if someone treats the gas pedal as an on/off switch.

As to the materials of the Caliber, their main problem is actually not the materials themselves, I mean most compacts have absolutely atrocious materials on their interior. Even the Civic's dash gives a deep hollow sound if you hit it with your knuckles. The Forte's interior is hard plastics all over too, yet no one harped much against it. The problem is the texture that really make it look really cheap especially in light tones. The old Chrysler vehicles had hard plastics too, but they gave it a dark color and gave them leather-like texture so that it didn't look cheap until you knocked on it. In 2010, the Caliber's interior has been modified, but they basically just modified the design a bit, added rubber paint on the hard materials of the dash and a few softer material on contact points, and it makes a lot of difference if not in actual quality, at least in the looks department.

Personally, I'd probable be driving the Caliber if it weren't for one thing: horrible highway fuel economy with the CVT. 7.3 l/100 Km with a 2.0L engine in a compact is unacceptable in this day and age. The city fuel economy is decent, but on the highway, it just plain sucks, old Buick Centuries did just as good and the V6-equipped midsize sedans from Chrysler get similar fuel economy. What gives? The Sentra and Versa get better with their CVTs, why can't the Caliber? I'm not saying it should battle the Yaris, but at least lower 6s l/100 Km is not an unreasonable expectation for an automatic compact with a 2.0L engine, right?

Otherwise, the Caliber is a pretty good value for the money. It really is cheap, especially with the rebates that Chrysler puts on their cars. The engine is decent if a bit loud under acceleration, the car is pretty comfortable for 4 adults, the seating position is relatively high which a lot of people like and it can take quite a bit of cargo, making it a versatile compact. It really is a shame that Chrysler didn't work out the problems of the car, it had a lot of potential.

Value for the money, you got to be kidding me right.  For the same price and "deal" you can get the Hyundai Elantra Touring which is 1000X better, with a much better warranty, looks better, has a much better interior, gets better fuel economy, has better auto/manual, and it actually will have a better resale value.  Oh did I mention it handles like a euro vehicle, unlike the Caliber that handles like a horse and buggy.  Only way that Chrystler will get their act together is if we as consumer stop buying that garbage.

A little harsh but I definately agree.

[Sival]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

It's a matter of programming. The unit may be the same, but a CVT succeeds or fails on the programming since it can be programmed to have any gear at all. CVTs are very good for people who are gradual on the gas pedal, but do act weird if someone treats the gas pedal as an on/off switch.

As to the materials of the Caliber, their main problem is actually not the materials themselves, I mean most compacts have absolutely atrocious materials on their interior. Even the Civic's dash gives a deep hollow sound if you hit it with your knuckles. The Forte's interior is hard plastics all over too, yet no one harped much against it. The problem is the texture that really make it look really cheap especially in light tones. The old Chrysler vehicles had hard plastics too, but they gave it a dark color and gave them leather-like texture so that it didn't look cheap until you knocked on it. In 2010, the Caliber's interior has been modified, but they basically just modified the design a bit, added rubber paint on the hard materials of the dash and a few softer material on contact points, and it makes a lot of difference if not in actual quality, at least in the looks department.

Personally, I'd probable be driving the Caliber if it weren't for one thing: horrible highway fuel economy with the CVT. 7.3 l/100 Km with a 2.0L engine in a compact is unacceptable in this day and age. The city fuel economy is decent, but on the highway, it just plain sucks, old Buick Centuries did just as good and the V6-equipped midsize sedans from Chrysler get similar fuel economy. What gives? The Sentra and Versa get better with their CVTs, why can't the Caliber? I'm not saying it should battle the Yaris, but at least lower 6s l/100 Km is not an unreasonable expectation for an automatic compact with a 2.0L engine, right?

Otherwise, the Caliber is a pretty good value for the money. It really is cheap, especially with the rebates that Chrysler puts on their cars. The engine is decent if a bit loud under acceleration, the car is pretty comfortable for 4 adults, the seating position is relatively high which a lot of people like and it can take quite a bit of cargo, making it a versatile compact. It really is a shame that Chrysler didn't work out the problems of the car, it had a lot of potential.

Value for the money, you got to be kidding me right.  For the same price and "deal" you can get the Hyundai Elantra Touring which is 1000X better, with a much better warranty, looks better, has a much better interior, gets better fuel economy, has better auto/manual, and it actually will have a better resale value.  Oh did I mention it handles like a euro vehicle, unlike the Caliber that handles like a horse and buggy.  Only way that Chrystler will get their act together is if we as consumer stop buying that garbage.

The Elantra gets the same fuel economy with the manual, it only gets better with the automatic. The Elantra may be a better car for a similar price, but this doesn't mean that the Caliber is a bad deal. Just because you can think of a slightly better deal somewhere else doesn't make a good deal a bad one.

[Winterpeg]

To sum it all up...the Caliber was and is a "cheap" (relatively speaking) vehicle for the masses.....suppose it could be an "cheap" (there's that word again) alternative to a minivan.  

[footlong58]

Anyone have any experience with the SRT4 model?  I've seen a few around...

[sacrat]

Such a disapppointing effort from Chrysler.  I remember being interested in them when they first came out, probably because it was another hatch on the market.

Then I sat in one at the car show and was completely turned off.   Such a brutal interior.

It's like deja vu (all over again). My first new car was a 1985 Dodge Lancer, sister to the Lebaron GTS. These were "European" styled hatchbacks that looked like sedans. As with the Caliber, reviewers liked the styling, but to quote one "The interior parts look like they come from a K Mart bargain bin."

Some things never change even after 22 years...

[auto_enthusiast]

Anyone have any experience with the SRT4 model?  I've seen a few around...

Though the Caliber SRT4 was a decent bang for the buck vehicle, the previous generation Neon SRT4 was better car in all performance aspects - it had similar hp and torque, was significantly lighter, had a lower center of gravity, a real LSD, and was a lot more fun to drive.

[John MacDonald]

Quite surprised to see that the CVT is made by Nissan's subsidiary as the CVT in the Sentra and the one in this thing are completely different. The Sentra feels much more direct and responsive - in the Caliber its very delayed in its responses - like an elastic band as one other poster noted. Too bad because yes the idea was a good one. Aztek anyone?

It's a matter of programming. The unit may be the same, but a CVT succeeds or fails on the programming since it can be programmed to have any gear at all. CVTs are very good for people who are gradual on the gas pedal, but do act weird if someone treats the gas pedal as an on/off switch.

As to the materials of the Caliber, their main problem is actually not the materials themselves, I mean most compacts have absolutely atrocious materials on their interior. Even the Civic's dash gives a deep hollow sound if you hit it with your knuckles. The Forte's interior is hard plastics all over too, yet no one harped much against it. The problem is the texture that really make it look really cheap especially in light tones. The old Chrysler vehicles had hard plastics too, but they gave it a dark color and gave them leather-like texture so that it didn't look cheap until you knocked on it. In 2010, the Caliber's interior has been modified, but they basically just modified the design a bit, added rubber paint on the hard materials of the dash and a few softer material on contact points, and it makes a lot of difference if not in actual quality, at least in the looks department.

Personally, I'd probable be driving the Caliber if it weren't for one thing: horrible highway fuel economy with the CVT. 7.3 l/100 Km with a 2.0L engine in a compact is unacceptable in this day and age. The city fuel economy is decent, but on the highway, it just plain sucks, old Buick Centuries did just as good and the V6-equipped midsize sedans from Chrysler get similar fuel economy. What gives? The Sentra and Versa get better with their CVTs, why can't the Caliber? I'm not saying it should battle the Yaris, but at least lower 6s l/100 Km is not an unreasonable expectation for an automatic compact with a 2.0L engine, right?

Otherwise, the Caliber is a pretty good value for the money. It really is cheap, especially with the rebates that Chrysler puts on their cars. The engine is decent if a bit loud under acceleration, the car is pretty comfortable for 4 adults, the seating position is relatively high which a lot of people like and it can take quite a bit of cargo, making it a versatile compact. It really is a shame that Chrysler didn't work out the problems of the car, it had a lot of potential.

Value for the money, you got to be kidding me right.  For the same price and "deal" you can get the Hyundai Elantra Touring which is 1000X better, with a much better warranty, looks better, has a much better interior, gets better fuel economy, has better auto/manual, and it actually will have a better resale value.  Oh did I mention it handles like a euro vehicle, unlike the Caliber that handles like a horse and buggy.  Only way that Chrystler will get their act together is if we as consumer stop buying that garbage.

The Elantra gets the same fuel economy with the manual, it only gets better with the automatic. The Elantra may be a better car for a similar price, but this doesn't mean that the Caliber is a bad deal. Just because you can think of a slightly better deal somewhere else doesn't make a good deal a bad one.

Most vehicles in Canada and the USA are bought as auto's so the fuel difference is pronounced.  How in your right mind can you say there's two vehicles, one's a slightly better deal and a much better vehicle, the other one is not as good of a vehicle (actually the worst in it's class to be honest) and is not as good of a vehicle, and then say the Caliber is not a bad deal?  The only way it could ever be considered a good deal is if it was cheaper than all competition, maybe start the price at $11,000 with 0% financing over 3 years.  Then you can say it's not a bad deal.

[Cory X]

Chrysler can build high quality cars,300,Charger,Challenger,Dodge Ram,Jeep Grand Cherokee,minivans,Journey..many new models are due this year, Mercedes really screwed Chrysler and they are now finally (hopefully) getting back,as they are improving the interior materials in their cars..It seems to be Chrysler's biggest draw back is the interior feel..Though they dont break or fall apart and Chrysler's are bullet proof reliable.. My small company drives 200,000 k in 4 years per vehicle and we are happy with our Chrysler products,oil,gas tires thats all we do !! The cars stand up well,no rattles,no squeeks ect...Even the people who drive them,if they do not personally own a Chrysler product,they are astounded by how reliable they are,and the interiors are not as bad as perceived,but yes need the feel /touch improvements as they are now doing.. ..I feel until they get new interiors,their image wont change..I here many new models will be out soon for the 2011 model year,personally I cant wait..

Chrysler was most profitable auto company before Mercedes ruined them..Also Chrysler's here sell very good,2nd best selling auto company,minus 2009 because a lack of inventory on lots and 6 month production shut down.