2008 Dodge Avenger 2.4 SXT 0-100 (0-60) Acceleration

[hobybobag3]

ok, so I'm not crazy... I test drove one of these and was baffled by how weak the acceleration was

[TehMG]

So I guess I wasn't imagining things. I had an Avenger as a rental car a couple weeks ago. Felt kind of slow and heavy compared to my Mazda3 (5-door sport version with 2.3L engine).

[whaler3232]

Worst transmission ever...If the tranny is very rough it shows its working great...I can't wait till this thing is off my hands...other than the tranny its ok I guess.

[fenix310]

who cares im not running from the cops or trying to kill my passenger like hulk hogans son

[yujuyeye]

whant a sporty car? buy a Charger or Challenger ...

[Moparman58]

thats not too bad i couted about 10 seconds, the 2011 will be much better. 6 speed auto

[pewster31]

This has got to be the 2.4 I have a dodge avenger 2008 sxt 2.7 and I timed myself at 7.9 downhill and 8.3 flat, which isnt bad for a car under 10 grand.

I had mine dynoed after a couple performance enhancing parts were installed:

Cold air intake by K&N

Performance coil and plugs

Custom exhaust (no headers... yet)

Dyno said 201 after a bit of tweeking i was able to get it to 213 but still i had a mustang GT (totaled) that was MUUUUCH faster.

[6JDGreen6]

@pewster31 where the hell did you buy this car under 10 grand? are you on crack? mine ran me 20 plus taxes and its only the se 2.4 2008 model

[Scor0806]

@6JDGreen6 you can get many used for under 10

[lawton187]

It wasnt designed to be raced!

[leadnsteel]

this engine is a Mitsubishi motor. I like this vehicle for the design, but Chrysler transmissions suck!

[rudolphna54]

@leadnsteel No it isn't. It's a joint venture between Chrysler, Mitsubishi, and Hyundai.

[NLbertNL]

its not the horsepower that make it slow its the weight thing weighs like 2000kg or 4400 lbs

[benzbubblecat]

'02-'06 sentra SE-R spec V: 2.5L I4, 175hp, 0-60 in 7 seconds

avenger: 2.4L I4, 172hp, 0-60 in 11 seconds????

[kykkow]

@benzbubblecat sentra automatic?

[benzbubblecat]

@kykkow I think motortrends tested the auto and manual with the same 0-60 times for that car

[RT360ci]

For a 'world engine', the 2.4L can hold it's own in its size class. Chrysler will soon have to increase displacement to keep it competitive, but nonetheless is a decent rid/commuter vehicle/daily driver!

[rudolphna54]

The 2.4 doesn't need displacement, it needs refined.

[RT360ci]

It's too late for refinement. Everyone has 'new' 2.5L I4 engines so displacement is the only way to stay competitive unless by some miracle they can squeeze an extra 10-20hp out of this engine, but that can't be done by refinement alone.

[rudolphna54]

Not really. GMs Ecotec is a 2.4, Fords is a 2.5, Hondas 2.4, Toyota 2.4. Actually this engine is a Chrysler/Hyundai venture. It's output is plenty high, but it is pretty rough. The 4 speed transmission it is coupled to is the big performance killer. GMs 2.4 only has 169HP but hooked to a 6 speed auto, it is much faster and more responsive. The hyundai sonata uses the exact same engine, and there are no complaints about roughness and noisy.

[RT360ci]

GM has caught up with refinement, but you pay for it. Toyota has a new 2.5L I4 that replaces the old 2.4L unit, to stay competitive. Its also easier to engineer a 6 speed, or higher, geared transmission to a larger displacement engine. Not necessarily to make it more efficient, but to lower engine rpm, and transmission hunting which does increase overall smoothness, and provide a quieter cabin. Hyundai Sonata is still more expensive than an Avenger. At least in Canada it is.

[lawton187]

@RT360ci the avenger is quick for a 4 banger. its stock setting is for gasmileage

[RT360ci]

@lawton187 Exactly. In a major magazine comparo a while back the Avenger got the best mileage at 26mpg overall for I believe it was a 400mile trip. However, it was ranked last for having drum brakes, and a few other inexpensive options that all it's competition had. However, for the price, you really can't beat it.

[rudolphna54]

People don't want fast so much. They want smooth, and quiet, which when they put it in the avenger, chrysler managed neither.

[RT360ci]

True. But the Avenger is the lowest price car in it's segment, and achieved similar mileage numbers when compared to a similar 2.4L Camry (Motor Trend test article).

[IIGOLGOTHAII]

my grocery getter 0-60 = 5.5 seconds:) check the vid out

[Tanner874]

Adequate acceleration.

[pumpkinzer0]

lol way too slow

[rmh1120]

yes it's not built for speed but for a 4 cylinder it'll hold its own with a lot of 6 cylinders. plus, i've gotten better times on mine than this...

[crashboss]

my old 98 cmry does 0 to 60 in 9 seconds woot

i4

[rudolphna54]

It's sad, this is essentially the same engine used back in the 70s and 80s in the Jeeps.

[stop103]

i have one they go 0-60mph in like 9 seconds, there not bad for a 4cyl and the sound meaner than they are

[frikinrican44]

the 2.4 isn't made for racing.......its made to get better mpg for a dodge sedan

remember ppl this isn't a vtech

[rudolphna54]

VTEC wasn't made for racing either. Its still an I-4.

[samler04]

it's slow like after one stratus...

[belizetj]

0-60 in 9.5 seconds. Not bad for a stock 4cyl.

[belizetj]

That was like 9 to 9.5sec. Because its 12 - 2.5 = 9.5. You don't count 2.5 as a second.

[shawtiee1085]

not bad. i counted 8.58 on my ipod which is peppy

the engine sounds good also!

[motormusique]

It does sound good, but I'm pretty sure you counted wrong...it takes at least 10 seconds.

[shawtiee1085]

yes i must have because i look at the video now and it doesnt look 8.5 sec ..