Autocar - First for car news and reviews

Dodge has always been Chrysler’s testosterone-infused brand. The Charger and Challenger muscle cars of the 1960s and the still-current Viper of the 1990s emphasise the point.

But Dodge also has a history of MPVs — or, as they’re called in the US, minivans — starting with the 1984 Dodge Caravan, available in both SWB and LWB versions.

To be a Dodge, a car has to be big, brash and square. It must ooze Americana. Which is why Dodge has styled the Journey – at heart an MPV – with...Read the full article

'The Point' being that there are a fair number of people out there who would rather their MPV looks like this than, say, the mind-bogglingly boring VW Touran or the nice-looking-but-image-hurt-by-99%-of-them-being-owned-by-minicab-drivers/Addison Lee, Ford S-Max/Galaxy. I think it looks pretty good, don't think it really looks like a 4x4. It's not that butch and the slightly chunky wheelarches are seen on many cars these days ever since the original Focus came out. I drove one of these a couple of days ago, believe it or not, back-to-back after stepping out of a beautiful white Gallardo. The engine is a bit agricultural I suppose, but it is the same well-regarded VW unit (I think) used in countless other applications without complaint. I'd agree that it isn't as smooth as the latest revised VW version but for some reason road testers don't seem to like this 138bhp unit when placed in a non-German car - for example, the Dodge Caliber with the same 138bhp VW unit got similarly ambivalent engine reviews, but in the Golf and Audi A3 it is a very popular engine with customers and reviewers alike. Other than Autocar's review of the engine, I think it was a great review and good to see a relatively strong score for this vehicle, which is great value for money when you take into account the colossal discounts you can get from day one at any Dodge dealer. As soon as I saw the headline, I thought it was going to be another anti-US review, one or two stars at best, but I'm glad to be proven wrong.

Spot on Julian. If you question the point of the styling of this car then surely you have to apply the same question to 99% of cars on the road. Function is one thing but it is a something that very few cars rely solely upon to make their case.

Actually, I think this car is a little too bland to be taken seriously as a rugged SUV. I think they could have gone a little further to be honest. I have the same criticism of the Quashqai- more jacked up hatch than toned down SUV.

But I would rather have one of these (or a quashqai+) than a virtually invisible Touran or something else just as dull. I just ended many years in an Espace in favour of a 7 seater Captiva, because I am so bored of driving a really contemporary 'egg'. I don't really care if the dynamics are somehow less rewarding than I am used and I don't care that some odd, smelly people will berate me for driving something so unforgivably irresponsible.  The fact that I really do live in the country is also irrelevant. I wanted an SUV because there is no other alternative to a proper MPV.

This Journey does have a point. It might not be especially fantastic as a car, but it does have a point.

It's a decent enough score by Autocar, but you can still see, from the choice of words in the article, it's a score given very grudgingly.

According to Autocar, the Journey has adequate performance, decent handling, decent build quality and materials, it's been thoughtfully designed and is practical, is a refreshingly different take on an MPV and is very well equipped and probably better value than most of its competitors. Indeed Autocar says "the Journey achieves its aim"....., but alas "it’s not for us".

Apparently "you may even feel a little ridiculous driving it" says Autocar. Why? It that because Dodge has dared to make the Journey look a bit different to the dull uniformity that pervades the market, which does not make you feel "ridiculous"? If so, then what happened to the "refreshingly different take on an MPV" that Autocar was harping on about earlier?

Exactly!

Overdrive:

from the choice of words in the article, it's a score given very grudgingl

Sorry guys, but this thing is a dog of the first order - I'm amazed it got given three stars. From the looks and price of the thing I'd think it would be closer to one. Alternative to an S-Max - hardly!

And you've driven it?

"From the looks and price of the thing" -  

I don't need to drive it to hate it: from behind it looks like that mid-1990s Ssangyong off-roader, the cabin plastics look like they came from a Christmas cracker and it uses the last generation 2.0-liter VW TDI motor which rattles like a skeleton pleasuring itself in a filing cabinet.

It doesn't just look like a dog, it smells, sounds and has fleas like one too.

Admittedly it doesn't set my pulse racing, but the cabin plastics - as noted in the review - are fine. The VW TDi engine is massively popular and well proven. Looks aren't to all tastes but it's no Ssangyong Rodius! As for not needing to drive it, well its very useful to drive it - or at the very least sit in it. Its hard to make a judgement on cabin plastics just by looking at pictures, and you can't comment on the 'rattly' diesel if you haven't driven it. The same unit is quietish in an A3 and a bit noisy in a Golf, noisier in the Caliber, etc - but it ain't that bad. List price is comfortably cheaper than the competition, spec-for-spec, and massively cheaper when you look at the potential discounts. If what you say is true, Autocar need only print some pictures, the price and a spec sheet and not bother with the review part!!

julianphillips:

he VW TDi engine is massively popular and well proven.

The VW TDi PD engine WAS massively popular, but has been left far behind. Often the installation is better in VAG cars due to better sound insulation and different engine/frame mounts. In almost all applications outside of VAG the engine is well off the pace in terms of refinement and is lagging behind now in economy, especially the Mitsubishi Outlander and various Dodge cars. If the autocar reviewers never gave personal opinions then any review on here would be pointless.

theonlydt:

ten the installation is better in VAG cars due to better sound insulation and different engine/frame mounts.

I agree on the installation issue, hence my comments about it in the A3 and Golf. However, it is most definitely NOT off the pace in almost all applications outside of VAG - this is 99% Autocar opinion and doesn't reflect the reality of living with the thing. Performance wise the engine is as strong as its successor, which seems mainly just to be a bit quieter (or 'refined' as Autocar would put it). Not sure why you single out the Outlander; in the Outlander it is a GREAT choice, and of the main European consumer publications that reviewed the Outlander, I only remember Autocar disliking the diesel - for example, Car wrote: "Given the economy and muscular torque of the VW-sourced unit, you’d have to really hanker after an automatic to want the petrol. Keep the engine above 2000rpm – it’s quite laggy for an advanced – and it hauls the Outlander along with ease, delivering plenty of in-gear go. Gearchanges are long but direct, the brakes feel strong and although you’d never mistakenly tank the Outlander with unleaded, the engine is reasonably refined. " I did find the unit to be a bit noisy in the Dodge Caliber but it works just fine in the Journey and it is refined enough.

Can't help thinking you're sticking up for this engine regardless of the evidence.

I've driven this 2.0TDI engine in a Dodge Caliber that I found I'd hired after asking for something Focus-sized. It was dreadful - loud, crude, sending vibrations through the cabin and with a pointlessly narrow powerband (1750-3000rpm, without earplugs.) It was literally louder than the Cavalier 1.7D that my dad did his repping in in the early '90s.

But I've also driven it in the current Passat, where it's perfectly acceptable. And, before anyone accuses me of an anti-VW bias, I did something over 100,000 miles in various cars equipped with the older 110bhp/ 130bhp 1.9TDI engines, which could be loud, but at least offered usable power from 1000rpm upwards.