Shurik

Look at the special edition specs:
http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/detai...cial/trim.html
pretty cool
Horsepower: 255@6500
Torque: 258@3900
Tires: 245/45R18 - wow.... I want those

sundance_gold

It could wipe your butt and make your bed but its still a Chrysler. AKA: POS!

mrdeeno

saw a pretty funny commercial though with the amish guy for it. i think it was for the 2002.

Scorpius

I test drove a 2001 3oom and it does indeed haul ass. We can still beat though - easily. Its not that bad a car, but still I wouldn't want to keep it more than three years.

Shurik

I think 2002 is more powerful than 2001....
but the size of stock tires is amazing...
245 - and that's a chrysler sedan
m3 has 225
it will probably kick our ass stock for stock

Rock Dog

My 2001 was rated at 253 HP. The interior was cool. The handling was very good for a car that size.

Alot of little features that the CL does not have.

Too bad my steering wheel oscillated from left to right about 1.5 inches while driving between 45-70.

3 sets of tires.
2 sets of rims.
many 5 star visits.
Chrysler says it's normal.

I Lemon Law their ass, and buy the CL.

I have never looked back.

Rock Dog

2001 specs

Horsepower: 253@6400
Torque: 255@3950
Curb Weight 3591

Rumour has it. That a vibration showed up in the car when they went from the 16" to the 17" wheels and tires. They introduced a new harmonic into the suspension, that could not have been accounted for in the original design. In order to fix it they would have to redesign the "unibody". Not gonna happen. So they tell you your "feeling" things. Customer perception.

I wonder if it went away with the 18's.

sundance_gold

I have a neighbor who had a 2001 300M. She just traded it in on a VW. The car was in for electrical system repairs more than it was on the road and the tires wore out very quickly.

You can't just look at a car's horespower and make a judgement. The experience is a combination of performance and many other variables (like cost, ride, handling, dependibility, etc).

Yeah the car may kick ass (when it runs) but if you can't use it because its sitting at the dealer waiting for a part, then you're really screwed!

Shurik

Well, I am not saying it's a good car. It is a Chrysler, and I know that
All I was saying was that it's pretty powerful and the tires are damn wide. I just love wide tires, and it's pretty cool
to get stock ones that wide.

JasonT

I owned a 2000 with 17's & the performance package. Switched to 18"s btw. It was a VERY good car. I had it 2 years, & had 3 problems. A bad speed sensor, a bad MAP sensor, & a minor water leak(bad seem) I put 42K miles on it. It did haul ass on freeway driving, & with the dual exhaust I had on it, it beat the hell out of a STOCK cl-s at speeds over 70mph. 0-70 the cl-s is WAY faster. The 300M's gearing is not setup for low end. However the 300M Special that came out is. It has a different set of gears that improves the low end. I only got rid of it for 3 reason:

1-Was my first new car, financed with bad credit, & a co-buyer. I was paying over $750/month without insurance, & that was with $6K down. It was just too much.

2-I looked at the resale value. By the time I paid it off, it would be worth nothing!

3-It was just too damm big for me. I was the only person it. I used the back seats maybe 3 times.

I paid it off by selling it, My ctredit jumped, & I was able to lease my CL-S in my name with out any problems. Paying a 1/4 of what I was.

Pics:
http://community.webshots.com/album/29400152ynZLXBXkAp

Scorpius

the 2002 300m is more expensive than the non-nav-TL-S... I don't think it'd be worth it.

DtEW

Two experiences with the 300M.

First time I ever drove it, it was in an autoX-like setting (Edmunds event). It was surprisingly fun to drive despite the fact that it was a large, FWD, American built luxo sedan. Dive into a corner hard enough and the tail kicks out the right way.

Second time was driving a rental 300M across Alberta, over a combination of highways and mountain roads. Decent, but compares a little short to Japanese big-3 refinement. 4-speed auto needs an extra gear.

I'd consider this car if I ever moved into rural America. For various reasons, an import will be more trouble than its worth there.

Thai95LCoupe

Yeah but thr Rear Tires on an M3 are 255/40/18

briancl

i admit it's a pretty nice car, but a CL or TL is way better in terms of looks, not sure about performance.

-briancl

Rock Dog

I don't know if I would go that far! The 300M is a very cool looking ride inside and out.

It some the TL in that department. IMHO
Jason's pictures are proof of that.
I know someone else who had one, and was VERY happy with it, like Jason was with his. But! On any given day, how many CL/TL's are on the hoist vs. 300M's? For every Jason 300M, there are 4 of Sundance's neighbor. Not so with the CL/TL!

BakedWafer

HP alone doesn't impress me much.

Red Nj-s

My dad had the 300M for 3 months before the Cl. He lost a ton of money on it, but it felt like it was gonna fall apart soon. The handling was pathetic, and it was slow. That was our experience.