The Caliber just looks "off"

[avant1963]

Take a look at these spy shots and tell me the rear just doesn't look right...

http://raywert.blogspot.com/2006/01/2007-d...ild-and-un.html

It could be that it was designed with a straight-edge and T-Square only. Could be that big-black plastic strip that runs the roof. Could be it looks very thin.

Looks like Jeep will have the best looking cars off this new platform.

Me no likey.

[CARBIZ]

It looks nasty from the back. Very disappointing from the earlier shots I'd seen. More trucky looking than car.

[PurdueGuy]

too tall & skinny. Made me think Echo there for a moment. :P Looks ok from the side, couldn't tell about the front.

[Sixty8panther]

Malibu Maxx ass mixed with a chunky greenhouse and gross proportions makes me wish they were redesigning the SRT4. This thing sucks!

[thedriver]

yuck. :thumbsdown:

[BuddyP]

That rear end is horrid. looked decent in the side shot though.

[ponchoman49]

It's interesting how most cars from Dodge lately are in your face over bold and are in station wagon formats. Why can't we have a damn car for goodness sakes. What was wrong with the Neon that a refresh couldn't take care of? do we really need yeat another crossdresser type vehicle? Geeesh!

[Matt276]

Oh Lord, worse than I thought, specially the rear. no, no, no.

[regfootball]

i think its clumsy, but remember, the designers are still trying everything to figure out the magic formula for proportioning vehicles like this. it will take time. much better to allow them to figure out how to make a successful functional vehicle design language than suffer through the old paradigm of low riding uncomfortable useless hardly functional vehicles. Edited January 5, 2006 by regfootball

[G. David Felt]

:puke: Tha is so Fuggly, they really should have just redone the Current SRT4. That will not be a hit at all except the dying baby boomers maybe. What a complete BOMB! :(

[ToniCipriani]

Looks like a deformed Optra rear end. No worries, Cobalt. It's no match.

[PeterJ]

i think its clumsy, but remember, the designers are still trying everything to figure out the magic formula for proportioning vehicles like this.  it will take time.  much better to allow them to figure out how to make a successful functional vehicle design language than suffer through the old paradigm of low riding uncomfortable useless hardly functional vehicles.

[post="68053"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That's an outstanding observation Reg. I'm the only one on this thread so far that doesn't dislike the styling to a greater or lesser degree. But I'm so biased towards the utility of five doors when it comes to anything in this size class or below that I might be giving it some style points it doesn't deserve. Personally, I think it looks less awkward than the Maxx, since people have brought it up in comparison. I'm at least interested enough that I'm looking forward to seeing it in person at the Minneapolis Auto Show in March.

I'm hoping for at least some degree of success with all of these new, functional 5-doors that are coming our way. The more the better. It's a solution to being compelled to upsize when what you really need is an efficient second vehicle for commuting, that can also carry the family and/or some gear in a pinch. I don't want small sedans/coupes to become extinct either, but once you move out of single life in an apartment, they start to become more and more useless. Edited January 5, 2006 by PeterJ

[BrewSwillis]

Looks better in black:

Front Pic
Rear Pic
Interior Pic

I like how eveyone is judging it based on cell phone pictures. I bet Jessica Simpson doesn't even look hot in most cell phone pictures. I haven't seen one in person yet, but someone on Allpar said that it looks lower in person.

I think it looks alright if your looking for a small utility hatchback. I'm guessing that there will be another Dodge vehicle based on this platform, that will more resemble the SRT-4 (Neon), and probably be a sporty coupe. As of now, I would prefer the Jeep Compass or Patriot.

[NOS2006]

I saw the front of one and thought it was a metal alien.

[haypops]

On the interior shot, what is that space above the top of center stack and the top of the dash cover? Perhaps the DMV was right to take away my driver's liscence. The rear shot looks so-so, its the 3/4 rear shot that looks strange to me. Just to busy. However, as in all vehicle but especially this class, functionality is king. Edited January 5, 2006 by haypops

[sciguy_0504]

Does this look less agressive than the concept? If it is, Dodge shouldn't have toned it down. Honestly, I like it. It's not your typical swoopy, boring 5-door. The interior looks cheap, though, but I guess it is an economy car. The powertrains give it a nice range, too. Hopefully the rumored pricing we heard a few weeks ago is not right. $30k for a diesel is rediculous.

[Mr Plow 2500HD]

:unsure: Wheres the body by Kia emblem?

[BrewSwillis]

Anything looks better than silver on this car......so far:

[Petra]

What is with those big, grey stripes that run paralel to each other on both sides of the roof, from the taillights to the bottom of the "A" Pillar? It didn't work for the ION, and it doesn't work for the Caliber, either.

[pow]

I don't mind the exterior apart from the front grille. The interior, on the other hand, uhh... looks "worse than shit." :lol:

[haypops]

The window/glass between what I believe is refered to as the c and D pillars is haped surprisingly like that of the Pontiac Aztek.

[BlkHhr104]

Why is one spoke bigger then the others on that lest pick of the blue one?

[Bimmer325]

Bruce...It's not the color bro. :blink:

I don't even know where to start. Chunky worked on the Magnum. Simply put, this thing looks like shit. I'm truly trying to find one attractive line on this car/truck/wagon or whatever they're planning on calling it. From the goofy proportions to the ridiculously chunky sheetmetal to the 4X4-esque stance and interior, this thing is a complete mess. Yes, these are only pictures. And they look terrible.

I didn't think anything could get more awkward or downright ugly than the Durango. Cheers to Dodge for proving me very, very wrong.

[FAPTurbo]

I actually don't mind the Caliber, but it really does look better in black. At least it looks a little different than all the Corolla's and Civic's out there which try to look inoffensive to all, but at the same time, bland and unattractive.

[MyerShift]

Not quite as bad as I thought it would be, but as I have stated before, DaimlerChrysler's North American Operations (Chrysler Corp.) need a proper small car. This, thing, disappoints in most areas. It's too big and too pricey when equipped with the various gizmos and gadgets. In a way, looks like the younger, retarded brother of the Pacifica :P . I'm not saying it won't grow on me, as the second generation of LH cars (notably the Concorde) grew on me after a while. It definitely needs a differently shaped and body-colour grille, plus less SUV flavour. SUV's suck. Just because you make trucks Dodge (cough, Stuttgart, cough) doesn't mean all Dodges have to bear THAT kind of family resemblance.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Blah. It looks good in deep red or, yes, black, but it looks downright stupid in any other color. The concept kicked ass. What happened? If anything, the Caliber is the result of incest. Seriously, looks as if a Magnum and Durango got busy in the bedroom of their trailer in an Alabama trailer park.

[Cadillacfan]

Right you are empowah. Seeing how the Cobalt was criticized for it's interior, this one will be a laughing stock. It seems as though the interiors of the Chrysler group are looking worse while the interiors of GM and Ford are getting much better. At least they have good styling.... on a few cars. Mercedes should be more involved in the interiors though. Exterior, while original has chunky and awkward styling that belongs on a much larger car or SUV. Dodge's desperate attempt to have a compact vehicle stand out from the competion basically gave designers permission to go way over-the-top and produce something that will scare away current Neon buyers. Edited January 6, 2006 by Cadillacfan85

[BrewSwillis]

HA ha :lol: ......I like how people are saying that they liked the concept, but don't like this.........and it's EXACTLY the same!

I'm not expecting people on a GM forum to be in love with it.....but c'mon :lol: :



:AH-HA_wink:

[sciguy_0504]

The only thing that gives me pause is the interior and rumored prices. I'd probably take one over any other compact car out there besides the Mazda 3. I like to look different. A lot of people don't like the SUV-esque styling but I think it looks good. The interior just isn't up to snuff.

[Turbojett]

I still say it looks like a Vibe.

[haypops]

$10 for the MP3 input jack and $105 for the 2.0 l. engine seem reasonable, almost silly not to be included. If the vehicle has easy entry and gains a reputation for mechancial excelence, many of us senior citizens will be interested even if it does resemble the Aztek.

[Cory Wolfe]

So... can anyone hear say ugly? Oh... all but a few can. Interesting. The front... isn't all that bad but the rear is absolutely horrible. I didn't think I could possibly see something more horrible looking. That is... until I clicked on that last link... Oh my... Do my eyes deceive me? No, I don't think they do... That interior... oh my... words cannot express how much displeasure it gives me... OH MY... MY EYES!!! MY INNOCENT EYES!!! DODGE HAS RUINED MY EYES..... OH!!!! Help me, god... :omfg: Suicide is the only way to rid my mind of this horror... :alcoholic:

[avant1963]

I never said that it was ugly, just that it looked "off". IN black it looks better because the black plastic strip on the roof is disgiused, but the very square look and tall/thin style is not flattering. Will it sell, sure because it is different and usefull. Will Dodge need a real four door/coupe also, you betcha.

[torobud]

I still say it looks like a Vibe.

[post="68544"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Wow - amazing deduction based on the fact that they are both 5 door suv thingies...

I think the Uplander looks like a Caravan... becasue they are both minivans...

I think the Solstice looks like a Miata... because they are both small sports cars...

Amazing - what an incitful comment.. Edited January 6, 2006 by torobud

[Dragon]

they are still making uber changes to the frame rails of the c-segment. while its big brother the d-segment is pretty much good to go and its almost a year behind the c-seg in prod. Edited January 6, 2006 by Dragon

[the_yellow_dart]

There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with the rear rim in this picture.

[BlkHhr104]

TOLD YOU THERE WAS!!!

[njtex]

I like the rooline on this one, especially compared to the weak attempt on the MAXX. The front 3/4 view shows a lot of MB influence in the hood/fender shape and up through the A-pillars. Otherwise, I've never seen so many different styling themes on one vehicle! Only time will tell if the U.S. market has an unlimited appetite for compact/tall/5-door wagons (unless they really look cool).

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

That's still a strange-looking, very un-Dodgelike (and not in a good way) car that doesn't disguise the fact that Dodge is clueless when it comes to what they're doing. I mean that year-plus delay between Intrepid and Charger was inexcusable-they should've had the Charger or whatever ready so that the unnoticed/unadvertised/average Stratus wasn't the largest sedan in the lineup. Vehicles like Pontiac Vibe, Toyota Matrix, and Chevy HHR may be popular, but there is no excuse that a conventional 4-door notchback sedan (and other body styles) should be missing from the lineup. The taillamps don't look very Dodge, neither does the windshield/roofline sloping ahead of the front doors, along with the wheel opening/front end/flat, odd grille area. And why is a 1.8-liter engine offered in this car? It will be weak I predict, ditto that for the 2.0-liter I-4. I imagine this will sell, but its comprimised.

[BrewSwillis]

And why is a 1.8-liter engine offered in this car? It will be weak I predict, ditto that for the 2.0-liter I-4. I imagine this will sell, but its comprimised.

[post="69162"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Maybe for the same reason why there is a 140 HP 1.8L available in the new Civic, or that DCX's 2.0L has 150 HP compared to Chevy's larger 145 HP 2.2L.

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/world-engine.html

[regfootball]

they probably should have squared off the backend more like a typical SUV

[loki]

i was going to say that is a durango and a maxx had a get together and this little guy came out later....lol eh..not to my likes...but what car is built that never sells?...(in the last 10 years) saying this just incase there are things that didn't sell longer ago than that :P

[MyerShift]

You know, I believe that I would get one (supposing I had the funds). And in person, the interior did not look that bad. Hey, when test mules are abandoned at all, I am over to snoop!