If anything with the belt tightening it may actually be less. As for handling the M held it't own against BMW's and Corvette's. in thing like emerg lane change and slomn. It is the strip that it hurt. If Chrysler is going to try to go upscale they should drop the 2.7 and 3.5L engines and only have the 4.7 and the 5.7 in it. Or it will be nothing more then a larger Cirrus. It will hurt handling (heavy front end) but should help it in other areas. I wish MB would use thier latest crop of trannys in the 300, insted of the ones they are giving to Chrysler. Watch out for some of those M's on the road they will be packing as much hp as the Hemi only in a 3.5L package.
I'm sick of reading the messages from the cry babies on how DC is changing their beloved 300m. You are the same people that whined while the 300m was in development, complained about how it looked and cursed the use of the "300" name. I'm just hoping the door seals work the trunk mat fits unlike your beloved 300m... Go DC!
"I'm sick of reading the messages from the cry babies on how DC is changing their beloved 300m."
Nobody here is "crying" about DC changing their "beloved" 300M.
There is no change. DC is abandoning it - period! It's a different car!.
I (and other 300M owners) have merely expressed our opinions on the new 300C. I thought that was the purpose of this forum. If DC hadn't called it a 300, I wouldn't have even bothered with comparisons with the 300M. Because they chose to call it a 300, it invites comparisons.
If you are sick of reading the opinions (and perhaps vehicle comparisons) of current 300M owners, maybe you should skip our comments. It's a free world!
BTW,
"You are the same people that whined while the 300m was in development, complained about how it looked and cursed the use of the "300" name."
300michael said "Watch out for some of those M's on the road they will be packing as much hp as the Hemi only in a 3.5L package"
Come on Mike , the day you crank out 350 H.P in a 3.5 without NOS , Turbo's or Supercharger you let me know. That V6 will never match the 5.7. Just wait till the 6.1 L goes into the 300. ;-)
Some of us (300M owners) are getting ready do start doing just that. We have been in talks with two speed shops that said it can be done (no NOS or Super/Turbo involved. Pistons, cams, and some porting and polishing alonge with new headers, and some other things. Level 10 has a kit to take care of the transmission, that will rid us of that 33% loss down to an acceptible 18-20 percent. The additions should work good with the PP gears and put them to even better use. The baseline testing should start very soon and have parts ready by Feb/Mar. A few years back I would agree, The M's 3.5 was the highest output engine. Now look It is near the bottom of the pack Nissan's 3.5L was less then 240hp now the same engine is putting out over 280hp stock. SoCal got there 3.5 over 300 horses easy the split shafts are what caused them to stop, because they couldn't handle the power.
Yeah I guess if you were to tear the motor apart and rebuild it with some custom parts you could make some pretty good power . well let me know how it works out for you guys. But I still think the C with its RWD V8 engine should do a number to the M . Dont get me wrong I really love the M but I really REALLY like the C .
300micheal - I doubt that the 300C w/ 3.5 will be slower than the a stock M. An improved drivetrain will likely make up for a little extra weight although I wish they would tweak the engine a little. "...a larger Cirrus," - If somebody orders their C w/ a 2.7L, cloth interior and only the bare essentials, then apparently they were looking for a larger Cirrus.
intrepidspirit - The C appeals to this 300M owner.
Had a chance to see it in person recently at the State Fair of Texas. It's definitely love-hate styling. Things that really stood out were the short overhang in the back and the grill. It will grow on folks similar to the CTS or FX or Maxima.
Size, power, & stand out in the crowd (in a good way) styling. Sign me up.
Otto, what info do you have on the 6.1. Will it be going into the Magnum as part of the SRT package? Or will it just be going into the "C"? Do you know what the hp and torque numbers will be and when they will be dropping that bad boy into the "C" and/or Magnum. Thanks for the info.
First off I must say that I’m more than a little P.O.’d that DC saw fit to discontinue the 300M which in my opinion is the best looking car on the street. Being an M owner, my opinion of course, is biased. Now to weigh in on the 300C and Pacifica. My first impressions of both, only by pictures, were much less than enthusiastic. With the Pacifica I felt they were trying for a revival of the ‘Station Wagon’. But after seeing a one up close I am warming up to it. When Dodge redesigned its trucks with the bold front grille I had a similar reaction. I thought it was ugly as sin. But I soon began to like it more and more. And I don’t even LIKE trucks. Now after seeing a few more pictures of the 300C my initial reaction is starting to fade. I’m anxious to get close to one so I can really check it out. I think my opinion of the C will change favorably once I see one in person. I hope that DC has some sort of muscle-car planned for its lineup in the coming years. With the revival of the Hemi, I think something along the lines of a ’69 Roadrunner or a ’70 Hemi Cuda would get some of DCs market share back.
Does anyone have any idea why DC will only be selling the Chrysler 300C Touring, which appears to be kind of a little more upscale Dodge Magnum SRT-8, outside of North America? I mean, they're building the thing in N.A. And it isn't unusual for Chrysler to offer its own version of a Dodge product. Why not in this case? Personally I think the 300C Touring would compete much better against some of the import competition. I thought it was sharp.
I don't own an "M", beespecial, but I always thought the styling of it was sweet. Not like all other cars, but a real head turner. I think the new DC lineup will be as impressive to you the more you see them. So many cars out there all look the same, it is nice to see something different. I think it was time for a change back to rwd too. With the technology today, it makes sense. Its not like the days when all you had was limited slip differential.
There is supposed to be a 300C at the auto show starting next Saturday. I don't know if it will be the concept or pre-production model. In either case, I am anxious to see it.
The 300C Touring will not be sold in America the demand for expensive wagons in America pales in comparrison to that of Europe. If I am correct, 33% of all cars sold in Europe are wagons. Hence, selling the 300C and the 300C Touring in Europe was only only logical.
of Audis sold in Europe are Avants (wagons). It's funny how this all-American automotive form has become so popular on the Continent while virtually abandoned here.
rusty104- here is some info I have found out . Now this is not 100% set in stone so it could change. The 6.1 will be in a SRT package that you will be able to order on the Magnum ,300C and future Charger . The SRT will include 6.1 Hemi, 20" wheels with 245/255 tires, lower gearing, suspension up-grades, unique fascias frt/rr, lots of special trim inside and out, etc. Not sure when DC plans to launch the SRT option , but it may be the one to wait for .
Otto, that sounds awesome! I will wait for it to come out, I've already been waiting since the concept car first came out, so a while longer won't hurt. Thanks for the info.
Hey Rusty104 - Did you get a chance to go to the NE Auto Show this weekend and did they have the 300C there? I was debating going to the show but I didn't see any press stating that the 300C would be there so I wasn't going to bother. Please let me know.
Was on the HWY 401 near London heading down to Windsor or the USA. The nameplates were all taped up, but it was on an open trailer. They looked like they had massive chrome rims....at least 18". Anyhow, the wagon was red. Nice.
I was 34 when I bought my White 300M. People said "nice car"...and it was. But if you like that car for anything else but looks...you must never have driven an Audi A6 4.2 Or a good Mercedes? Sure it was a great looking car, but fake wood can look like wood....but IT IS NOT WOOD.
I owned it for 12 months...and I loved it...for the looks, but it was terrible to drive. Too much road noise reverberating through the cabin. I was a JOKE car, just an Intrepid with a more powerful jnk engine, with a dumb excuse for a slap-stick.
I honestly brought it back to the dealership and PAID $1000 to get out of the lease. And I TOLD THEM it was a crap "drivers" car.
There was zero quality problems, but you cannot make a world class car or a great handling car with parts that are not engineered to be world class. That 300M wasn't, and the 300C hopefully will be much better. However, since that time I also bought a Jeep Liberty (which is great for the $$) and a Jeep Grand (which is the biggest pile of crap I've ever owned), so I think I am completely finished forever with Chrysler crap. I WOULD buy a Mercedes though.
So the Liberty is better than the Grand? The Liberty is a poor excuse of a replacement for the Cherokee, which it was to replace. Jeep, other than its Wrangler is moving away from true off road capable vehicles in favor of plusher street 4x4's. I find this to be the fault of DC as the only off roader they have ever made that was worth its salt was the UniMog. And you "think" the C will be better than the M even though you have nothing to base that on other than your own personal bias and preceptions? Is the C going to be better cause the Gremans got their hands in the making of it? So far that has not been shown to be true with the Crossfire. I think my M is a fine car, it handles nicely, gets up and moves when I need it to, it has given me 70K trouble free miles in just shy of 3 years. I'm on my third set of tires, second set of rotors, one tranny filter fluid change and nothing more than normal oil changes. My In-Laws have owned a few benz's and they spent more time in the shop than on the road, it was always something wrong or it needed maintenance. My Mother-in-law now drives a luxo/phg 300M and my father-in-law a Jeep Grand Cherokee. Both could not be happier.
Great review from someone who actually owned one. I heard several people say it felt more like a large Dodge Neon than the flagship of the corporation.
Road noise is something Chrysler has dropped the ball on. The first LH cars were awful. GM did this when the Wbody cars were introduced in '97. In 2001 the entire mid size line got additional fender liners to help ameliorate it.
shulaj - those cars were on there way to CTC( chrysler tech center )in Detroit for evaluation .They are the first batch of cars 3-4 a day being built at the Brampton plant.
Hi rusty, thanks for the info on the 'missing' 300C. I found out too late though, the rest of the auto show was enjoyable though. The Chrysler area had the Crossfire up on a platform and I talked to the woman giving the presentation and she said she was orignally called in to do the presentation on the 300C but it was changed last minute to be the Crossfire. She didn't know why it was pulled but when I asked about price, rather than dodge the question, she answered right away, "low 40's and about 5G more for the hemi model" but that they had to wait for production to start before they could be firm on that range.
I'm kind of worried about that price range. I don't know of anyone who would shell out 40G for a Chrysler with a 2.7L engine. It just seems ridiculous to offer this car with a 2.7L, 3.5L and 5.7L engine. I hope DC just ditches the 2.7L and offers the base in the 3.5L with the 5.7L as this years upgrade and the 6.1L that was alluded to in earlier posts in the '06 model year. I think that would really satsify their target market.
Most Cadillac CTSs have a MSRP under the 35-37K range. There are very few that are in the 41-43K range. Once you go over 40K ther is much more and better competition. Chrysler needs to price it around 35-36K base with options on top. Hemi shouldn't cost 5K more. Engine is probably cheaper to produce than the 3.5 SOHC motor.
The Buick Ultra with a 3.8 6 @ 240hp lists for $42k, yet you can get it for $34k after the rebate. The actual price for a 300 with a comparable engine will have to be competitive with whatever that Buick is selling for at that time. Except for perhaps a short time after it is first introduced, the 300's will not be selling anywhere near list (unless DC does what I think would be smart and sticker the car closer to what they can really get for it). So in today's market I would think the 300C would actually sell for starting in the high 30's even though the sticker would be in the 40's.
The low end 300 models will be targeted at V6 Accords and Camrys, so there's no way they'll be anywhere near $40K with the 2.7L V6. I expect only the most heavily optioned 300 to barely break $40K, much like the Pacifica or Town & Country.
Too bad the 300C Touring won't be sold in the US. Its front end looks a lot better than the Magnums, imo. Also, I tend to think of Chrysler dealers as somewhat more upscale than Dodge dealers.
I agree with you svevar, but I don't think there will be a lot of options to check on the "C". I may be wrong, but it seems from what I have read that DC wants to upgrade their top end Chrysler. Moving up to a 5.7l HEMI from the 3.5l would merit maybe an $850-$950 price increase. I think they want a lot more than that from their top dog and accordingly will add a lot of standard equipment to it vs. the 3.5l. I also think much of that equipment will not be available even as optional on the rental car 2.7 version. By the way, as much respect as I have for Harman, based on my experience with Boston Acoustics, I wouldn't be surprised if they give M-L in the Lexus a run for its money in the "C's" audio department.
Yes, I agree that the 300C, like the current 300M, will likely have very few options, instead coming fully loaded out of the box. I'd bet that only the base and Touring models will have extensive options lists. Perhaps All Wheel Drive will be among the 300C's options?
If Chrysler really wants to upgrade their top-ended car, why are they offering the 300C in cheaper forms - i.e. 2.7 and 3.5 litre engines? This only serves to downgrade their top-ended car. By "intrepidizing" the 300C, their biggest market will be in the rental fleets!
Surely they could develop a lower level sedan to put the smaller motors in.
As a 300M owner, I have always appreciated that Chrysler did not downgrade the car by offering cheaper versions, like they did with the Intrepid...
I don't think it's reasonable to be comparing the 300C to the Buick. The most reasonable comparison for the 300C is the Lincoln LS. It's available in V6 and V8 engines, has RWD, and is from a domestic company's "upscale" lable, but has the guts of their foreign subsidiary (The Jag S-Type) which raises it's credibility somewhat. Granted this makes the 300C still overpriced if it's priced in the low $40's but I think that when Chrysler looks into their competition scope, the LS should be the first thing they compare it against. BTW, the LS makes a quick $3200 jump in list when you upgrade from the most expensive V6 to the cheapest V8 so hearing a $5K bump for the Hemi doesn't sound unreasonable.
between the 300C and the Lincoln LS. However, the 300C is heavier and bigger. The LS is touted as a luxury performance sedan; I think you can leave performance out of the 300C description. I doubt that it will have the handling capability of the LS (or the 300M, for that matter).
I believe the 300C will be billed as a luxury or entry level luxury sedan and will therefore appeal to a different market than the LS.
Chrysler recently had an entry level luxury sedan -- the LHS, which was longer and rounder than the 300M. It couldn't even compete with the 300M and eventuallly became a Concord model a couple of years ago...
I have no doubt that the "C" will be more than $3,200 more than the next level car. What I meant was that the addition of a hemi alone would not justify thousands of dollars of additional cost any more than it does on the LS. When you add larger wheels, a 5-speed transmission, nicer interior, better suspension and so forth then you have a different situation. As I wrote, I suspect the "C" will be fully loaded and therefore obviously merit a price significantly higher than the next model down. By the way I still think overall the new DC series is closer competition to the Buick full sized sedan line than to the Lincoln LS one. I would view the 2.7l as more comparable to the Buick (Le Sabre in this case) than it is to the entry level LS, regardless of which wheels drive the car.
Can't believe they are actually going to put a 2.7L engine in this car. I guess that will be their mileage champ and probably have a 10 sec. 0-60 time. Or they will put a stiff rearend gear in it to get it going.
The 300C with the 2.7L engine is just for so that Chrysler can play the affordability card in their advertisements of the 300C. Most buyers will upgrade to the 3.5L or the Hemi. Considering that Chrysler said that the base 300C will compete with Camery and Accord, the 300C with the hemi should not cost more than low to mid thirties. The 5.7L hemi only cost $895 in the the Durango and Ram, so it might cost the same in the 300C. BTW, acceleration times for the 2.7L might not be that bad considering that its transmission is derived from the "old" Mercedes-Benz five speed; one of the best transmissions currently on the market. The price of the 300C might reach the low forties if Chrysler puts their new 6.1L Hemi that will first be used in the Ram and produces over 400hp and 400lbs of torque. However, this engine may be used to power a rumored LX car that is larger than the 300C which might get the Imperial name. A photographer for the automotive section of Popular Mechanics said that he say a disguised Lx that was considerably larger than the 300C at over 200 inches. The engine has not been revealed yet, but insiders have managed to get a picture of it.
Chrysler has been touring the country, showing off its upcoming new models to dealers and the press. They announced that the base 300 with the 2.7L will start around $25,000 to compete with well-equipped Accords and Camrys. A 300C with the Hemi engine should go for under $35,000. The car will be launched in April `04. Here's the link:
$25-35k not bad, and may be able to pull away some accord/camry/whatever potential buyers who want a more aggressive look, assuming the car is well executed and (frankly) doesn't come off like American junk.
I called my local dealer yesterday afternoon, which gave the date of Jan 26th, as to when they will be accepting orders for the 300C.
On another note, DC's decision to roll back the price of the 300C to something more realistic is great news, as 40+ grand would make me rethink the whole deal.....a nice car like this, priced in the low 30's, is quite more down to earth.
Comments
As for handling the M held it't own against BMW's and Corvette's. in thing like emerg lane change and slomn. It is the strip that it hurt. If Chrysler is going to try to go upscale they should drop the 2.7 and 3.5L engines and only have the 4.7 and the 5.7 in it. Or it will be nothing more then a larger Cirrus. It will hurt handling (heavy front end) but should help it in other areas. I wish MB would use thier latest crop of trannys in the 300, insted of the ones they are giving to Chrysler.
Watch out for some of those M's on the road they will be packing as much hp as the Hemi only in a 3.5L package.
Nobody here is "crying" about DC changing their "beloved" 300M.
There is no change. DC is abandoning it - period! It's a different car!.
I (and other 300M owners) have merely expressed our opinions on the new 300C. I thought that was the purpose of this forum. If DC hadn't called it a 300, I wouldn't have even bothered with comparisons with the 300M. Because they chose to call it a 300, it invites comparisons.
If you are sick of reading the opinions (and perhaps vehicle comparisons) of current 300M owners, maybe you should skip our comments. It's a free world!
BTW,
"You are the same people that whined while the 300m was in development, complained about how it looked and cursed the use of the "300" name."
What forum did you see this in?
Come on Mike , the day you crank out 350 H.P in a 3.5 without NOS , Turbo's or Supercharger you let me know. That V6 will never match the 5.7.
Just wait till the 6.1 L goes into the 300. ;-)
A few years back I would agree, The M's 3.5 was the highest output engine. Now look It is near the bottom of the pack Nissan's 3.5L was less then 240hp now the same engine is putting out over 280hp stock. SoCal got there 3.5 over 300 horses easy the split shafts are what caused them to stop, because they couldn't handle the power.
Certainly more cost effective.
intrepidspirit - The C appeals to this 300M owner.
Had a chance to see it in person recently at the State Fair of Texas. It's definitely love-hate styling. Things that really stood out were the short overhang in the back and the grill. It will grow on folks similar to the CTS or FX or Maxima.
Size, power, & stand out in the crowd (in a good way) styling. Sign me up.
Now to weigh in on the 300C and Pacifica. My first impressions of both, only by pictures, were much less than enthusiastic. With the Pacifica I felt they were trying for a revival of the ‘Station Wagon’. But after seeing a one up close I am warming up to it. When Dodge redesigned its trucks with the bold front grille I had a similar reaction. I thought it was ugly as sin. But I soon began to like it more and more. And I don’t even LIKE trucks. Now after seeing a few more pictures of the 300C my initial reaction is starting to fade. I’m anxious to get close to one so I can really check it out. I think my opinion of the C will change favorably once I see one in person.
I hope that DC has some sort of muscle-car planned for its lineup in the coming years. With the revival of the Hemi, I think something along the lines of a ’69 Roadrunner or a ’70 Hemi Cuda would get some of DCs market share back.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Thanks!
Thanks!
But if you like that car for anything else but looks...you must never have driven an Audi A6 4.2 Or a good Mercedes? Sure it was a great looking car, but fake wood can look like wood....but IT IS NOT WOOD.
I owned it for 12 months...and I loved it...for the looks, but it was terrible to drive. Too much road noise reverberating through the cabin. I was a JOKE car, just an Intrepid with a more powerful jnk engine, with a dumb excuse for a slap-stick.
I honestly brought it back to the dealership and PAID $1000 to get out of the lease. And I TOLD THEM it was a crap "drivers" car.
There was zero quality problems, but you cannot make a world class car or a great handling car with parts that are not engineered to be world class. That 300M wasn't, and the 300C hopefully will be much better. However, since that time I also bought a Jeep Liberty (which is great for the $$) and a Jeep Grand (which is the biggest pile of crap I've ever owned), so I think I am completely finished forever with Chrysler crap. I WOULD buy a Mercedes though.
most reviews were very pleased with 300M's handling capabilities.
I heard several people say it felt more like a large Dodge Neon than the flagship of the corporation.
Road noise is something Chrysler has dropped the ball on. The first LH cars were awful.
GM did this when the Wbody cars were introduced in '97. In 2001 the entire mid size line got additional fender liners to help ameliorate it.
I'm kind of worried about that price range. I don't know of anyone who would shell out 40G for a Chrysler with a 2.7L engine. It just seems ridiculous to offer this car with a 2.7L, 3.5L and 5.7L engine. I hope DC just ditches the 2.7L and offers the base in the 3.5L with the 5.7L as this years upgrade and the 6.1L that was alluded to in earlier posts in the '06 model year. I think that would really satsify their target market.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
There are very few that are in the 41-43K range.
Once you go over 40K ther is much more and better competition.
Chrysler needs to price it around 35-36K base with options on top.
Hemi shouldn't cost 5K more.
Engine is probably cheaper to produce than the 3.5 SOHC motor.
- Mark
By the way, as much respect as I have for Harman, based on my experience with Boston Acoustics, I wouldn't be surprised if they give M-L in the Lexus a run for its money in the "C's" audio department.
http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_cod- e=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=04160646
--is that good or bad??
By "intrepidizing" the 300C, their biggest market will be in the rental fleets!
Surely they could develop a lower level sedan to put the smaller motors in.
As a 300M owner, I have always appreciated that Chrysler did not downgrade the car by offering cheaper versions, like they did with the Intrepid...
I believe the 300C will be billed as a luxury or entry level luxury sedan and will therefore appeal to a different market than the LS.
Chrysler recently had an entry level luxury sedan -- the LHS, which was longer and rounder than the 300M. It couldn't even compete with the 300M and eventuallly became a Concord model a couple of years ago...
I guess that will be their mileage champ and probably have a 10 sec. 0-60 time.
Or they will put a stiff rearend gear in it to get it going.
6.1L Hemi Engine
http://www.apexmodified.ca/pics/hemi61.jpg
http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosinsider/0311/18/a01-328608.htm
when they will be accepting orders for the 300C.
On another note, DC's decision to roll back the price of the 300C to something
more realistic is great news, as 40+ grand would make me rethink the whole
deal.....a nice car like this, priced in the low 30's, is quite more down to earth.
Good move, DCX......