Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Chrysler PT Cruiser (2005 and earlier)

1568101129

Comments

  • dlusgerdlusger Posts: 8
    We went from a 96 BMW 318ti to a Cruiser. Compared to the bimmer the clutch was easier to depress - less fatiguing. The PT clutch engages a little abruptly. Seemed not much clutch travel to me. But, the learning curve was quick. I didn't notice after a short period. Now I see it as a very smooth clutch. Agree with boaz47 that it has small narrow throws. Once mastered, it shifts just dandy on a hard acceleration with smooth clutch/shift action. As I said in the earlier post - great acceleration. Real fun to drive.

    Still gets admiring looks even though Cruiser supply is plentiful.
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    of great acceleration and PT Cruiser. At least not when you go from a GM pickup to one. Granted the one I drove was automatic but I had to keep kicking into passing gear to get it moving on the freeway.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    The stick pulls harder than the auto but it isn't as quick as many sports sedans. It is 4 tenths of a second slower through the quarter than a Sierra HD with a 8 liter V-8. Of course if people want something to pull harder they can just wait for the Turbo. Looks like next year. But then it is called a cruiser after all. I tried the auto and I will admit you can't be in a hurry. But then, in all fairness isn't it better to give the people time to watch your ride drive by?
  • crkeehncrkeehn Posts: 513
    The stick is a very pleasant driving vehicle, and is more than adequate to drive. It shifts well and is very easy to get used to. When I got my stick, I had not driven a stickshift in 15 years (since my marriage) I had little difficulty in getting back into the saddle. I have little difficulty in chosing my gear, when I want 5th, the gear level moves right into it. The other comment that it has a narrow shift pattern is correct.

    The Auto is also a pleasant driving car, certainly not as peppy as the stick. My wife has the auto and she has no complaints about it for the driving she does. It is certainly able to keep up with traffic easily.

    As someone else pointed out, the car is called a Cruiser. It is not a sports car, just a fun-to-drive, fun to be seen in car.
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    with the 150 hp Quad-4. This car weighed 2800 lbs and was pretty snappy. When I first read about the PT it was supposed to be around 2800 lbs so I was looking for it to run as well. But then it got a little "porky" by the time it hit production. I'm in bumper to bumper traffic coming home from work so I'm not sure I could put up with that much shifting every day. But I would like to try.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    If I were still commuting in traffic I might have picked the automatic. I did that for many years when I worked in LA and in the afternoon traffic was a bear. But now I live in the mountains and have a easy 16 mile coast down the mountain every morning and the stick pulls a bit better for the windy uphill run in the afternoon. I plan on changing to a cold air intake and a free flowing exhaust soon. This car has enough power for my needs and I don't need the added temptation to see if I can attract more black and white cars. If a person wants more zoom they can wait for the turbo or the after market people have a bunch of speed parts for the PT. You can order everything from headers to superchargers right on line. It is my feeling that these cars are designed to be eye candy. Plus it is one of the most practical cars you can buy. I have never had a car that was easier to turn into a panel truck from a sedan or wagon.
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    pretty difficult to find a rental with a stick. BTW, the automatic I did drive I rented while my Sierra was in the shop.
  • revkarevka Posts: 1,750
    From Edmunds' coverage of the 2002 New York Auto Show: 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser Turbo. Let us know what you think.

    image

    Thanks for your comments!

    Revka
    Host
    Hatchbacks & Station Wagons Boards
  • crkeehncrkeehn Posts: 513
    It's about time, but I'll stick with my stick and my wifes auto, they're fine for us.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    I think motor options are good for just about any car. What the Turbo does is allows those that are leery of adding their own speed parts a factory option with warrantee. It should help the line a bit but I hope people won't have to wait two years before the price comes down out of the clouds.
  • jlvjlv Posts: 14
    Hello.

    I do not own a PT nor have I ridden in one. Someone told me they
    have a terrible blind spot at both back corners. I am very
    curious about what real owners have to say about this.

    Thanks.

    Jv
  • crkeehncrkeehn Posts: 513
    My understanding is that the 2001 cars with the rear headrests had very poor rearward visibility. The 2002 went with a smaller rear headrest which reduced the problem.

    The car does have fairly thick window pillars and you do have to get used to proper driving technique. You not only check the mirror but also check out the window (which is what I was taught in driver ed all those many years ago.) That said, neither my wife's touring edition with headrests or my classic without headrests is difficult to drive.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    I had not noticed until you asked. Yes, there is a blind spot in the right rear. I would say it is a half of a car size blind spot. In other words when you look back about half of a normal car cannot be seen if it is right in the spot. But the mirrors are adjusted to view right into the same spot. I tend to use my mirrors more than some so I never noticed.
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    of the new vehicles you'll notice many that are a lot worse. (or look like they would be based on the thickness of the "C" pillar). On my GM pickup it's the "A" pillar where it meets the dash combined with the side mirror. You can lose sight of a whole PT Criuser there!
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    My Mazda B-2500 doesn't have much of a blind spot but it is a standard cab with sport mirrors. I even looked at the PT Panel but I knew I would need bigger mirrors than standard if it didn't have any side windows in the back. Like I said I didn't notice the spot until someone asked but I think it is clearly covered by the standard mirror position.
  • After 4 years of having a Sebring convertible the PT blind spot is a lot smaller than the conv. but is larger then my Subaru wagon's 'C' pillar.Just takes getting used to. and remembering to use the mirrors. Thats why they are on the cars. Also unless you want 12 to 14 seconds in the quarter, this car is able to keep up with other traffic just fine.( I'm just a old fart ) but I've had 390"s and 430"s
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    to the left of a 300M yesterday on the highway and was looking at the back window and "C" pillar on it. Must be hell trying to see out of them. Gotta say though after all the aniticipation I was disappointed when I finally drove a PT. Other than the huge diff. in power from my truck I suppose the seating is more a matter of getting used to it. But dam they look cool!
  • frank58frank58 Posts: 54
    I have a deal weorked out to buy a PT but the power and seating scare me. I feel the lack of powqer and I just feel the it is a tight fit. I am not that big.

    Any commnets out there?

    Frank
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    Tight compared to what? Compared to a Yukon or Expedition? My son and his friends are all between 6 feet and 6 ½ feet and they have all commented about the increased headroom and usable legroom in the back seat. In truth is seats 4 adults in comfort. It has more room than the other wagons I was looking at plus it does not have that sit on the floor legs stretched our in front position. Power is good for the class it is in. The P-5 and Matrix only have 130 HP stock and the Saturn L series only has 142 HP. I don't know what the CR-V and Rav-4 have but in room and power the PT seems to hold its own. Not a racer by any means but respectable. If you wait till the beginning of the year I believe you can get the turbo with another 60 HP. I'm not sure if it will still be a ULEV car still but who knows? There is a reason it is called a Cruiser.
  • frank58frank58 Posts: 54
    Thanks for the input, and sorry for the typos.
    I am going to buy it next week, it is the new blue color with the touring package.
  • crkeehncrkeehn Posts: 513
    Sounds like a nice car. We have an automatic touring edition in Inferno Red and a 5 speed classic in Steel Blue. Both are very nice. I would consider the performance to be adequate with both cars, my wife is racking up the miles on her touring edition and still threatens to rearrange the face of anyone who comes near her beloved car.

    Recently I have seen comments on the suitability of the Cruiser for the handicapped, especially people who may have arthritis in the knees. With the upright seating position and the doors that open widely, it is a very easy car to get in and out of.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    Motor Trend or Car and driver had an interesting article on that issue. They were saying that the move towards taller cars makes it easier to get in and out. The also indicated that you have more room to get out of in a parking space because the door is not as wide. Low short cars need wider doors so you can get out and so they have to have more room to swing open.
  • 300michael300michael Posts: 1,815
    of your PT Cruisers? Is it 9006's
  • bpraxisbpraxis Posts: 292
    Hello everyone and I hope that you are having a nice day.

    Regarding the purchase of a New PT in your opinion will I regreat purchasing the base model instead of the touring?

    Is there that much of a difference in handling given the different suspension and tires? Actually I like the idea of not having to clean metal wheels and think I can live with the wheel covers.

    Thankyou very much for your feedback.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    You can upgrade wheels and tires if that is important. I believe you are offered more options with the touring model. It is more like a package deal. If you don't need the options offered with the Dream Cruiser series get the Limited Edition, if you don't need all or that get the Touring and if that doesn't strike your fancy get the base model. Most of the options I wanted will be aftermarket so some of the factory ones are not as important to me. All I wanted was alloy wheels and the 16-inch tires. I knew I wanted a stick and the color but that was about it. I like the sun/moon roof but I have always distrusted them living where it might snow. Even if you decide to get different rims and tires later at least you will not be making payments on them.
  • crkeehncrkeehn Posts: 513
    What Boaz said.

    Actually, take a look at what is offered with the Touring Edition, which is not offered with the base. Are they things you have to have or can you live without them. The suspension is noticeably firmer with the touring edition, I suspect the handling is superior but I don't push either one to their limits. Some of the Things that come standard with the Touring Edition are very nice to have, the Remotes and Sentry Alarm system. It also comes with power door locks and power heated mirrors. Are those things you can live without or do you need them.

    My wife is frustrated with my Classic as she is used to the power door locks in the Touring. She is constantly leaving my car unlocked and I have to follow behind her and lock her door.
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    If someone wanted to put in one of the more exotic after market security systems they all come with auto locks. I like the one with the auto start but I do not think it comes for a car equipped with a stick? At least you couldn't leave it in gear and start it. For me it is just who will get my money in the long run. The factory when I buy it or the after market people when I think I can afford it. For some it is better to get all they need up front, because they can't seem to save to get it later. For others it cost more to finance something they can buy later.
  • txyank1txyank1 Posts: 1,010
    cost of a PT I'd go for more than the base model. Although in my case I may have to buy a base model as I've decided I couldn't replace my pickup with one. So it'd have to be an extra vehicle. A most-of-the-time commuter. FYI......I haven't found any wheels easier to clean than a chrome wheel. And they look very good too. Even if I bought a base model I'd put on custom chrome wheels.
  • bpraxisbpraxis Posts: 292
    Thankyou for your comments about the base verses touring models. I presently have plastic wheel covers on my 2000 vehicle and I love the fact that no cleaning is required for various styled wheels.

    I will test drive both models and see if I can tell the difference in handling and ride comfort.

    I wonder if the base model with 15 inch tires would get better gas milage and be faster because of the greater power required to move 16 inch tires.

    Once again thankyou for your comments and have a great weekend.
1568101129
This discussion has been closed.