gannet

That chopped roof is silly.

What were they thinking over at DC when they drew this thing, Hemi or not?

caball88

the Chrysler 300 looks awesome. it looks like a bentley, but cost 1/10th of the price. its in the same price range as the TL. definitely would be some competition for acura in my opinion. very different styling tho.

harddrivin1le

The 300 is faster, though. And it's also rear wheel drive, as any real performance sedan should be.

I personally like the looks of the car and it's basic platform is based on that of the previous gen Mercedes Benze E-Class.

What they were "thinking" was a modernized version of the original 1955 300. Look at those cars and you'll understand. (The "300 HP" that's hyped in the ad is SAE GROSS; that would translate into perhaps 220 SAE NET HP (which is the way engines are rated today):

http://www.lhmopars.com/MOPAR_Ads/55-300ad.html

Norse396

The new 300 looks ok, not sure I like the grill, but otherwise it's ok, but I know too many people with too many issues with their Chrysler's.

gannet

Yeah, they got me into a Chrysler only once, a '94 Eagle Vision TSi. Got 176K miles out of it, but man, I don't want to even think about the cash and down time I spent on that puppy.

harddrivin1le

That was 10 years ago...

Then again, quality concerns would prevent me from buying any Chrysler product today, too.

The American Car companies have "done it" to themselves.

They build the occasional "niche" vehicle (like the Corvette) that's interesting for what it is...

I wouldn't even consider one in terms of "mainstream" cars (4 door sedans, SUVs, etc).

smoore

I looked at the 300M before I leased my TL. I liked the exterior but I didn't like the interior nearly as much. I also liked the electronic goodies in the TL better.

jjay

I love what damler chrysler has done in the last couple yrs finally the interior of most of their cars does not look like crap. That said the tl is still a better car as far as faster than the tl it is so close nine out of ten times my skills are goin to make my tl faster...I turn the vsa off tack up to about 4g and drop the muthafuckin clutch...feathering second and third so my tires grip ok... and even faster cars in a road race dont keep up, on a qtr mile maybe different but my tl will never see a drag strip...anybody can drive straight fast thats easy, road racing is about skill,,,yrs ago i had a hopped up 78 280z that car was bad..a freind of mine took me to a place were they do timed runs thuough cones,, i knew my reardrive z would do great! and it did but better drivers with front wheel drive cars still dusted me... that was a good lesson.. the biggest difference to me in front and rear drive is in a corner when you start breakin traction with front wheel your screwed rear wheel you are just starting to have fun...jjay slv sixspd nav 18" rims...

harddrivin1le

The all new 300 has NOTHING in common with the 300M...totally different cars.

harddrivin1le

The all new 300 has NOTHING in common with the 300M...totally different cars.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...0306_f_chrysl/

harddrivin1le

How do you know that the TL is "so close" the all new Chrysler 300 in terms of acceleration?

BLEXV6

Let me see, I had the choice between the 300 and TL. What would I do. I would not even be seen at a Chrysler dealer.

harddrivin1le

That comment isn't relevent to the question I posed to him:

synoil

Went to the Detroit auto show and looked at the 300. Very nice
exterior, lots of room inside. My problem is the interior. Seems cheap compared to a TL.
Nice car though. For the starting price of 23-24K it's alot of car for the money.
The Dodge Magnum wagon was pretty neat also.

I have lots of friends who have 300m's. Some with well over 100K miles and still going strong.

I will get my TL next week hopefully.
Craig

harddrivin1le

But the Chrysler comes with a hemi V8 and rear wheel drive....

It's also a heavier vehicle (more steel).

They have to take the $$$ out from somewhere in order to offer the car @ ~ $32,500 (WITH the Hemi).

Everything has trade-offs...

Skeedatl

Unless the 300 is a totally bloated pig, it's going to be quick with V8 power. So will the Dodge Magnum.

harddrivin1le

It weighs 4,018 (with the Hemi), per Chrysler's website.

Still, the TL would have to weigh less than 3,200 pounds to match the 300C (Hemi model) in terms of peak power:weight.

The hemi has a much more robust/flatter torque curve as well...So it will produce more average power throughout the rev range.

In reality, the 6 speed TL probably won't be far off from the 300C (which comes only with an automatic).

Auto:Auto, the 300C will be the quicker car.

Chrysler SHOULD have cast an aluminum block for the automotive (vs. truck) applications. They should also have given it more cam and more compression. The result would have been a ~ 110 pound reduction in engine (and hence vehicle) weight and a solid 30-plus HP gain (very conservative estimate).

Of course, MB essentially owns Chrysler...so Chrysler cars can only be "so" good.

1SICKLEX

I think the old and new 300 cars have and will be great cars for DM. Very solid cars. But looking at the stats, the HEMI with all that power may be a flat 6 second car.

jjsC5

What are the reasons for this? I would think that with Chrysler's quality (lack of) reputation, they would want the higher quality of a cast iron block! Hey, if it's better for a truck, then it must be better for a car- right?

Norse396

I've had more issues with this TL than every Ford I've owned since 1985.

harddrivin1le

How many REAL high performance cars still use iron blocks? Off hand, I can think of one (last Ford Cobra.) And despite what they claim, that was a COST issue.

Iron is cheaper than aluminum...And the ~ 110 pound weight savings is arguably "negligible" in a 5,000 truck.

harddrivin1le

Yep...a lot of people seem to be reporting a lot of problems with TLs on this site.

Of course, the TL probably has more content than your Fords had...And more content = more parts. That raises the likelihood of failure (someplace in the car) exponentially.

That's one reason I liked the 1LE Camaro...manual seats, manual windows, manual locks, no cruise control, no ABS...Fewer things to break.

Skeedatl

Other than my 89 5-0 (save for a few T-5's but those were my doing ), Fords and me haven't gotten along. 93 MK8, pile, then a Continental that was such a problem Ford had to buy it back. I've never owned a Chrysler product, but a few of my friends have Rams and they haven't seen any major problems with them.

I'm wondering if their QC programs where changed after the buyout. Jag sure improved after the Ford purchase.

harddrivin1le

My '95 Taurus SHO was the worst piece of garbage I've ever owned. EVERYTHING broke. Every part on that car was seemingly engineered to be as cheap as possible without falling off in your hand before the warranty expired.

Real crap.

None of "the big three" currently builds a car that I both want AND am willing to pay for...

I like the upcoming C6, but not enough to spend $50K on one (plus whatever mark-up the dealer will place on top of that.)

Think what you want, but the '99 1LE Z28 has been an EXCELLENT car. Yes, the interior looks like it was designed/molded by Rubbermaid and yes, I had a few MINOR problems (all of which the dealer happily fixed under warranty). It MOVES, it has wonderful brakes and it's phenomenol in the twisties. It also gets good mileage and has been extremely reliable since the dealer handled the few glitches ~ 4 years ago.

I'd get another one if they were still building them (preferably with Accord grade (or better) interiors). But GM, in all its infinite wisdom, saw fit to not build them so that they could build crap like Pontiac Azteks and that new SSR "truckster" that is downright USELESS.

Norse396

I see the same thing on Nissan sites, Lexus sites, people will complaign aout problems more loudly than when things are fine. I'm sure over all the TL is fine, mine just has more than it's fair share of issues.

More content, this is such a bullshit excuse. My Sport Trac was full of goodies, and it had 4 wheel drive. More content is a lousy excuse to make.

You should have bought a Chevette, near nothing in that bucket so it should have been perfect...

Norse396

You completely missed the point of the SSR, it wasn't meant to be anything more than a toy...so of course it's useless, but it is cool.

casooner90

What are you guys thinking about? How could you even think that the 300 is worth to compare? I'm sorry, but that is one UGLY car - period. Looks like that freak mobile in the movie "Duel". Just Fugly!

I agree that Chrysler is coming out with some attractive body style, but my experience with the big 3 is over. If I like oil leaks, shop visits for their free coffee or mystery sounds after break-in, I can always turn to one of the big 3 to wet my appetite.

harddrivin1le

Let's see how many they sell and whether or not it helps or hurts GM's bottom line.

The 5.3 engine in that is all wrong, too. The thing weighs ~ 4,400 pounds and costs ~ $50K. The 6.0 liter from the "SS" pick-up (345 HP SAE NET) was the OBVIOUS choice for the "SSR." Yet, they chose the 5.3.

harddrivin1le

I wasn't aware that GM built Chevettes in the 1999 model year. And assuming you're correct in suggesting that they did build them, I'm sure they didn't run low 13s, produce ~ 300 RWHP, come with a Torsen differential, a 6 speed, big 4 wheel discs with Bosch ABS and double adjustable Koni "Yellows."

It's an engineering fact that more content (parts) increases the likelihood of failure in any machine. And just because YOUR "sport trac" didn't break doesn't mean that others didn't. Ford's quality record ON AVERAGE is abysmal; that becomes obvious to anyone who reads CONSUMER REPORTS, J.D. Power Surveys, etc.

casooner90

"Ford's quality record ON AVERAGE is abysmal; that becomes obvious to anyone who reads CONSUMER REPORTS, J.D. Power Surveys, etc."

I agree with this statement. There is a ton of complaints on this site about every little thing on the TL (the gap on the dash is too much, aluminum scrathes too easily, don't like the blue lights, etc...), but I think this is just bitch & moan and nothing more. Like driving, everyone act like a bad a$$ when behind a wheel, but timid in grocery lines because there is someone that can and will challenge you. The internet provides a safe haven for all of us to complain about every little thing.

Personally, I've owned some cars in my life and here are the ones I can remember.
'57 Chevy - leaked oil all the time. I lived under the hood.
'78 Z28 - swapped motor. constant leaker. I lived under this hood also.
'97 Talon - just changed oil and drove (Can't remember what the engine looked like)
'98 Pathfinder - just change oil and drove. I did change the plugs after 20K because I missed doing a tune up.
'97 G Caravan - transmission replaced after 40K. Leaked fluids all over my garage.

I realize that this isn't a scientific study, but does leave a bad taste. This has nothing to do with the American workers vs. others since most of the euro and asian cars are now build here also. I just believe that the big 3 are happy that they have loyal fans (must be the cheap beer at the neckcar ) and no real motivation to change their quality any time soon. Or, maybe the grandfathered, unionized overpaid work force? Don't know the reason, but the big 3 cars do have a terrible repuation based on Consumer Reports, JD. Power and others.

Back to 300, yeah, they're still FUGLY.

Norse396

Uh, did I indicate they did? The suggestion was meant as a joke. Sheeesh

Do you wet your pants everytime you brag about that? Who cares? Do they build that car anymore? Nope, it's dead like the Chevette. I wonder why, hmmmmmmm...

No DUH, I dind't say that adding more stuff didn't up the probability for things to go wrong, I said it was a piss poor excuse. Build quality is what I want, with that other things usually fall into place. Using your thought process I should buy a Yugo because it only comes with a heater so should therefore be perfect because it isn't complex.

My experience with Ford, which dates back a long long time doesn't bear this out. The Sport Trac enjoys a very good reputation and I base my purchases on past experience. Which is why I stay far away from Generic Motor's cars, because in my experience they are piles of crap.

Drive by the Chrysler plant in Illinois sometime, you see a lot of Ford's in the parking lot. The last guy I knew who hated his Ford turns out the moron never changed the oil or took care of the car.

harddrivin1le

Sounds like you need to unload your new Acura and get into a "quality Ford." LOL

More parts = more POTENTIAL problems. That's simple reality.

You are but one person out of billions; your PERSONAL experiences are therefore meaningless. MeaningFUL studies include large samples sizes which are statidtically significant and therefore allow the formation of a valid conclusion. And on that level, Ford builds crap.

Check J.D. Power, Consumer Reports, Wards, etc if you don't "believe" me.

Here's a newer example:

http://www.baileycar.com/JDPsurvey_html.html

"...GM was the only one of Detroit's three automakers to rank above the industry average of 273 problems per 100 vehicles,
with its Buick, Cadillac, GMC and Chevrolet brands all performing above average....But the Ford brand was below average, with 295 problems per 100 vehicles, dragging down the company as a whole. "

rynpamn21

i got to admit though she looks beautiful....does look like a bentley

harddrivin1le

....and it's based on the previous generation Mercedes Benz E-class platform.

Norse396

Don't think I haven't given that some thought. Go ahead and laugh, GM dropped the Camaro for more than sagging sales. Ford quality has been 100% with me and the car that kicked the Camaro’s arse for 35 years is still around to brag about it.

Why do you insist on being redundant? Where do I dispute this? Why do you feel the need to repeat the obvious? Here is what I said, again since you still haven't brushed up your reading skills "It's a piss poor excuse". Ok, now got it? Nowhere in that statement do I refute complexity adding to possible problems. Build quality is number one, without that the rest is meaningless.

Bullshit they are, I'm not telling you to buy a Ford am I? What rock you crawl out from under, does your opinion matter when you're buying a car? Or are you just stupid enough to just read Consumer reports and buy soley on that? Everybody bases their purchase on some personal experience.

Well it's in good company then with GM isn't it. I've never gotten crap from Ford so the people who did can buy something else. I buy what has worked for me.

Believe you, who gives a crap what you think, I didn't ask you what you think did I. As for J.D. Powers, Consumer Reports et al, I read them and then use their information with my personal experiences and try to buy the best car for what suits me. Sometimes I don't agree with them, I'm allowed this which might just shock you.

Wow, GM did so awesome, good grief. Listen, you use stats, this makes you happy, goody for you. When and I doubt this will happen anytime soon, I buy a bad Ford product I'll probably stop buying them. This has yet to happen; I have had incredibly horrible GM products which has guaranteed I'm never buying from them again.

Now maybe for once you can accept that we won't agree on something and chalk it up to agree to disagree, this doesn't need to turn into yet another 15 page diatribe of you repeating yourself ad nauseam.

harddrivin1le

Go buy a Ford; get a used one, though, since their cars lose the cash equivalent of ~ half their MSRP during the first two years.

How much "more" HP did those aluminum heads add to the L-78 again?

Norse396

Yup, just like Chevy, welcome to the fold.

How many Camaro's have they made the past few years? Oh, that's right, they don't because Ford chewed them up and spit them out. Get over yourself 1le... lets see how long you'll carry on with this again... what air filter do you use again? Oh wait, how about your head lights and how awesome halogens are... once a troll always a troll.

harddrivin1le

A good set of halogens offer several advantages over
HIDs. I posted links explaining why that is so.

The Mustangs were behind the LS1 F-bodies in terms of performance in every way until the '03 Cobra made its debut. That was one year AFTER F-body production stopped.

And GM sold more F-bodies during the final years than Acura sold Integras....

http://www.camaroz28.com/articles/02...rs/index.shtml

UminChu

Norse, you're being baited. It doesn't matter that you're making perfect sense, he isn't listening anyway. He isn't even interested. He's obsessed with the last word, plus he enjoys getting you wound up. Look at his cheap shot about the aluminum heads (while he reserves all claims to the high road and moral outrage for himself lol). He's trying to make you dance for him. You really want him to shut up? Give him his precious last word. Just let it go. He isn't worth getting annoyed over anymore.

Norse396

You did? Where? I must have missed this, can you explain again how they are better, I'm sure some people must have missed it. After all you know everything about everything, you da Google man!

Unfortunately that's not what killed them now is it, sales me boy, it's all about sales.

Well guy, this doesn't matter since the Integra isn't the main competition for that model. Hey as long as you feel good about your purchase....