Mom bought a 2011 Durango.

[SteveSRT8]

It IS all marketing, and the new gen hemi has earned a pretty good rep as a decent engine.

FWIW, I think the redesigned Durango is mega hot. Great looks and even better dynamics. If I was an SUV guy I'd have to give it a look.

 

[kkreit01]

Your mom is smart. The new Durangos are very nice. It will probably get nearly the same mpg as the Nitro, and haul a lot more. In the summer, my Aspen averages 15 (mixed) City. Highway is 19/20 -- on aggressive AT tires. If I had lrr tires, I'd for sure get 1 mpg better. My Aspen has never been back to the dealer for any issue.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: VNTS
My friend has a Charger RT and brother Challenger RT
Both get over 25 mpg highway.


Except that Durango weighs 5300+ lbs and has aerodynamics and wind resistance of a small house.

Quote:

I believe the Ram gets 20 mpg highway. I believe the AWD Hemi gets 20 mpg highway.

That's true, but the OP mentioned 13 mpg CITY, not hwy. Still, that's not all that bad. If I don't baby it, my 530i will get 13 mpg city as well.

Fuel economy aside, the new Durango is a nice looking SUV. I like it.

 

[SteveSRT8]

How about 5500 fully dressed?

And even Car and Driver got 15 during their whip [censored] testing.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
It's like how the Mustang guys liked to think their 302 really had 5.0 liters of displacement.



Not really.... The 5.0L moniker existed to differentiate the 4.9L 300 I6 from the 302. The subsequent stigma that eventually became associated with the badge didn't happen until the 87-93 cars IMHO. That is when the "five point oh" thing came about. Early "5.0L" badged engines, like those in the F-150, Panther cars, Thunderbird....etc were not known as "5.0L" cars. There was no identity associated with the badge until the last-gen Fox cars.

the HEMI moniker's infamy on the other hand was directly related to the fact that the engine had hemispherical heads, and the name, and the engine, instantly became synonymous with performance.

The reincarnation of the name was a logical move because of that yesteryear stigma, even though the modern incarnation does not wear hemispherical chambered heads.

Now, some fun regarding the displacement of the 302:

302ci equates to 4948.893 cm³. If we round up to 4950cc (4.950L) and then again to take this to our regular two-number litre designation, the rounding rule dictates that 5 is rounded UP. Which brings us to 5.0L.

HOWEVER

the 302 is not necessarily a 302.

4.0" bore
3.0" stroke

301.59ci

Converted to cc, we end up with 4942. Which would be rounded DOWN to 4940cc, or 4.940L. Giving us a 4.9L engine.

But if we use the metric numbers:

102mm bore
76.2mm stroke

303.97ci

So if you use Ford's "less than accurate" 302ci designation, it does round-up to 5.0L. If you use the metric engine dimensions.... it is 5.0L. But if you use the imperial bore and stroke numbers of the engine, it is 4.9L by the math.

Sufficiently ridiculous for sure

 

[nomochevys]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
It's like how the Mustang guys liked to think their 302 really had 5.0 liters of displacement.



Not really.... The 5.0L moniker existed to differentiate the 4.9L 300 I6 from the 302. The subsequent stigma that eventually became associated with the badge didn't happen until the 87-93 cars IMHO. That is when the "five point oh" thing came about. Early "5.0L" badged engines, like those in the F-150, Panther cars, Thunderbird....etc were not known as "5.0L" cars. There was no identity associated with the badge until the last-gen Fox cars.

the HEMI moniker's infamy on the other hand was directly related to the fact that the engine had hemispherical heads, and the name, and the engine, instantly became synonymous with performance.

The reincarnation of the name was a logical move because of that yesteryear stigma, even though the modern incarnation does not wear hemispherical chambered heads.

Now, some fun regarding the displacement of the 302:

302ci equates to 4948.893 cm³. If we round up to 4950cc (4.950L) and then again to take this to our regular two-number litre designation, the rounding rule dictates that 5 is rounded UP. Which brings us to 5.0L.

HOWEVER

the 302 is not necessarily a 302.

4.0" bore
3.0" stroke

301.59ci

Converted to cc, we end up with 4942. Which would be rounded DOWN to 4940cc, or 4.940L. Giving us a 4.9L engine.

But if we use the metric numbers:

102mm bore
76.2mm stroke

303.97ci

So if you use Ford's "less than accurate" 302ci designation, it does round-up to 5.0L. If you use the metric engine dimensions.... it is 5.0L. But if you use the imperial bore and stroke numbers of the engine, it is 4.9L by the math.

Sufficiently ridiculous for sure

Absolutely correct and the original poster has no clue. Good job.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But if you use the imperial bore and stroke numbers of the engine, it is 4.9L by the math.


That's correct. Measuring the bore and stroke of the engine as Ford measures it (in inches), it's a 4.9L engine.

We had one in a '92 LX. It was one heckuva engine.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But if you use the imperial bore and stroke numbers of the engine, it is 4.9L by the math.


That's correct. Measuring the bore and stroke of the engine as Ford measures it (in inches), it's a 4.9L engine.

We had one in a '92 LX. It was one heckuva engine.


But the Windsor engine was assembled in Windsor, Ontario. And we use metric up here sir

 

[BBDartCA]

Originally Posted By: SLCraig
Originally Posted By: FirstNissan
...AND Exxonmobil says a big THANK YOU to your mom.
Seriously, 13mpg is a joke, fuel is not getting any cheaper, its gona hurt at the pump!


Truth.
I am shocked they still make stuff like this.
People I work with talk about $200 to fill a gas tank on a truck they drive to work.. How can anyone justify that?? I'd be unloading it at any chance I could get.


Same here. I had a Hemi Durango the last time gas was 4 bucks a gallon and man that thing HURT to fill up. Just an absolute gas hog around town or in congestion. Spent months trying to sell it and it went for WAY below blue book. But, if you do not drive that much, its not a big deal to have a gas guzzler so as long as the reason you do not drive much is not because you do not have a job.

Mopar is in trouble with a very limited offering in cars that good good mileage.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
But the Windsor engine was assembled in Windsor, Ontario. And we use metric up here sir

Okay, I'll yield to that.

Would've been easier if Ford just made it a 303 cui. LOL

 

[hattaresguy]

I don't understand the Hemi thing its really an old design that has been around since the 20's in one form or another. Do the new engines even still have hemispherical heads?


I hope she likes it, the new ones do seem like pretty nice trucks. OTOH I just put $100 into my Silverado yesterday and that didn't fill it, if I didn't need a truck for work I'd get out of it so fast.

 

[Cutehumor]

Originally Posted By: Stewart Fan
I talked to my mom this morning. She decided her 2009 Dodge Nitro was too small to haul her 4 grandkids around,so she bought a new Durango.

This was totally out of the blue. The only vehicle related talk I've heard from her lately is how she hated the 15mpg the 4.0 liter engine in the Nitro got.

Now she has an AWD Durango with the 13mpg (city) 5.7 liter Hemi.

My mom drives me crazy. She never does any research,always buys the first car she test drives,and I guarantee she overpays every time.

She's blowing all her money so you won't have any inheritance. she spent it all for the grandkids.