A friend is leaving town (and the country) and has offered his 2000 Dodge Durango with 77,000 miles to me for $11,000. It seems to be in very good condition ... a fews dings and scratches but it does have a killer sound system (my 15 year old son is sold on that point alone).

Does anyone have experience with the Dodge Durango?

We currently have a 1995 Chevrolet K2500 Suburban with 150,000++ miles. With three kids and lot's of stuff to tow the Suburban has been great, but the 10-13 mpg is getting kind of old ... and so is the rest of the vehicle.

The Durango seems a bit small ... but compared to a Suburban K2500 most rigs seem small.

Any opinions?

Thanks

Eddie

I'm not sure the Durango gets much better milage. They are notorious for sucking fuel. We had a '96 Suburban that got 15MPG with the packasport on top. Our newer '03 Sububan gets exactly the same. Once you've had a suburban......how can you downsize? Especially with the kids and all the stuff.

I'd look at another Suburban, oh, that is what we did!

How is the transmission working? Alot of Dodge tranny's go downhill close to 100K and need to be rebuilt/replaced (which runs about 1700 labor included on the right coast)

Do the Vortec 5.7 engines get much better fuel mileage than the old TBI 5.7 engines?

Thanks

Eddie

Comparing yours and mine I would have to say YES. The Packasport is good for 1 less mpg than when it's off.

Check for recalls. Some of the Durango's had problems with the front suspension- wheels tended to fall off. This was for only a few years though. My daughter has a 2003 Durango, and loves it. Joe O.

Not sure about the 2000, but I've had a 2003 Durango for 2 years and I love it.
It's got the 5.9 liter engine and gets about 14 mpg no matter how you drive it, maybe a little over 15 on a long road trip. But if your Suburban gets about the same mileage and you need the space, I'd say go with the suburban, the durango can get a little cramped with a big clan loaded in.

Of course you won't be as stylish goin down the road.

Hey

Durango is a good looking truck, weak motor, weak front end. Durango's are HORRIBLE on gas.
I can go on and on about differences between the 2, but if your goal is milage, forget it. 11K is in the "norm" price range. But if you want a cool looking, truck to pick up tightys, its fun, and farely reliable, and cheap to maintain (and you can still pretend to be normal when the wifes around). I bet you he's selling it for "milage" issues tho.

Your truck still has a lot of life in it, some of the best GM pickups came from the mid 90's.

Later

I had a 2000 Durango prior to buying my 2002 Tahoe. I thought the Durango was under powered and eventually proved to be too small. One other major issue was on long hills(extended periods of high RPMs) the AC would stop blowing out the dash vents and switch to the defrost vents. The dealer said this was vacuum related and nothing could be done about it. The second dealer said the same. that didn't cut it when it is 100 degrees outside. I bought my Tahoe new and now have 78K on it. Only thing that has been done to it is new tires now and then and the oil change ever 3k miles.

Dont buy it...

I have a 2001 with the 4.7. Its horrible on gas. The front end is really skidish (sp). It did go in for the recall on ball joints.
I was told the back is 4 feet wide, I specially asked for plywood etc. It's not 4 feet wide. The backseats, 3rd row, are very cramped.

I paid just over $14,000 for one with 34,000 miles. The only thing good is it can tow my trailer and the sound system is decent. Other then that I would get a Tahoe or Sub.

what about a Yukon or Tahoe ? smaller and 1/2 ton rated

You can get a 1/2 ton Suburban....

I have a y2K 1/2 tone Suburban....my second.

The 5.3L motor is much better than the old 5.7L

I have 4:10 gears because I use it to tow a 8,000LB RV.

I get 8.5-10 MPG towing the RV. 12-13mpg in town and my wife has gotten 17Mpg on a trip to and from Reno.

If you want a solid tow vehicle that can haul the kids animals and toys...nothing comes close.

This one currently has about 60K miles of which ~1/2 have been towing a race car trailer, RV or some such....
Still has the original brake pads and rotors front and rear with ~1/2 pad life left.

Much better on braking and brake wear than my old '93 had.

Next new tow vehicle for me will be either another new Burb or a chevy Votex Max 1/2 ton truck or 3/4 ton with 8.1L and Allison 6 speed automatic.

We have 2002 Durango SLT Plus with the 5.9L V8, Infinity sound system and all the other ‘bells n’ whistles’ & we are very happy with it. The third row of seats is on the cramped side but for short trips they are perfect. I enjoy all the room it offers and how it drives & since I’ve never been into the huge SUV trend (like the newer Durangos ), the smaller Durango fits our needs best.

As for the gas mileage, oh yeah it sucks big time. Around town I get 11mpg and our trips to Vegas it gets up to 16mpg (woohoo ). My only saving factor is that I live less than 5 miles from work and my kid’s schools.

Would I do it all over again? Maybe the same car with the smaller engine?

I just got rid of my 1998 5.2 Durango, purchased new. It gave good service and I liked the fact that you could drive and park it around Chicago much easier than trying to navigate a Suburban.

However, for the entire time I had it, it averaged 12.9 mpg (79,000). I gave it to my nephew when his 200,000 Dodge Neon gave up the ghost and he needed another car. I replaced it with a Scion xB, and borrow it back on the few times that I actually need a truck. Makes $3.00/gallon gas a while lot easier to swallow and I have my toys when I want to clear my head. Driving in Chicago just isn't fun no matter what you drive. AC and radio are all that really matter.

always liked surburbans/tahoes over the durangos and they seem to be more reliable...but the sound system!