By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
http://home.comcast.net/~bangaroo/p1.htm
Just click "Videos" and you're there.
I'd say to look into the '05's. It's getting a facelift, with some hood, bumper and fender changes. Plus the HP/TQ will be increased by 25. Minor interior changes is also to be done in the '05's.
IMO, it looks better plus you can't go wrong with the extra umph ;-)
This is what we call a "hopeless case." Everyone take notes...
OK, so patience is a virtue, so they say. The STS is off the charts -- the way it has to be optioned to get AWD is nertz or crazy. I can get an SWB Audi A8 for that kind of money (well, almost). The SRX with the magna ride and the V6 is MSRP'd at $53K and change (again this seems out of the league of sanity). So, I sit with my choices (on paper at least) being an open minded test drive of the 300C w/AWD and all options $42K? and MAYBE even the SRT-8 AWD @ $47K?, the Acura RL at just south of $50K and two Audis, both 3.2L FSI V6's: the A4 3.2 north of $42K and the A6 3.2, south of $52K. Have driven the Audi 3.2, have looked at but not driven a 300C RWD (and have no intention of doing so, waiting instead for the AWD flavor) and have looked at the Acura (but they are so rare at this point there are none to be driven in my geography of North East Cincinnati).
The 300C AWD should be in its third week of production now -- unless I miss my guess (which I may have) there must be some hitting dealers soon or already.
Has anyone driven one of these things? Not ordered, but driven? Heck, I would even like to hear from a Company Person who has driven both -- it seems to me that the 300C w/AWD (and with some slight bit more of cred now that it is the COTY) would be a bargain and worth comparing to the A6 and the RL (and if one would buy the Chrysler, well wouldn't that mean "and change back from your $50,000?")
My wife says overcoming the "dealership experience" will be a challenge after having dealt with a premium European car line for so long. . .we'll see.
The AWD 300C driven question still stands.
Thanks for your input. . .
In what category does the 300C fit? Not in the cars mentioned above. ~ Mistake #2.
Low MPG against who? How? ~ Mistake #3.
In the beginning, the 300C's had complaints about harsh ride, but supposely was corrected. The car I test drove didn't have the "harshness" they are claiming but the suspension is not Cadillac. I prefer some 'stiffness' in the suspension as long as it's soft enough for comfort.
CR tends to be biased too so none of what you wrote surprises me... plus if their testing holds true (as per your post), then someone in CR doesn't know what they're doing.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Car and Driver put the 300C on their 10 best list -- I don't go to Car and Driver for advice on washing machines or toasters, why listen to CR on this [automobiles] subject?
I don't know if the 300C is a great car or not -- from a reader's point of view it seems like a bargain -- a lot of car for the money. Frankly, such a review from Consumer's Reports is, in an odd way, encouraging since they know little about cars when compared with the writers and editors of Car, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Autoweek, and, gulp even Motor Trend from time to time. Oh BTW, the 300C is Motor Trend's COTY, which means a bit more than anything CR could say on that subject.
CR is, IMO, a decent source of information about appliances -- the 300C regardless of what it may ultimately turn out to be is NOT an appliance.
Seems to me that cars getting high praise from both Consumers and Car & Driver (et al) are plentiful and worth considering. Just as a car that is ripped by C&D is probably one not very interesting to a lot of people who would consider a 300C, knowing a vehicle’s warts before you’ve owned it for a week should be interesting to everyone. It’s real easy to fall in love with the appearance, acceleration, and handling of a car like the 300C. Those warts have a way of annoying you for years.
Another point to consider – Consumer Reports buys their test vehicles from a dealer just like any of us do. The car buff magazines get theirs supplied directly from the manufacturers. Those car magazine vehicles are not necessarily in the same condition as the vehicles sold to customers. That includes both quality and performance.
I am seriously considering acquiring a 300C. I know it is not a perfect car. The visibility is lacking, the trunk is too small, and the gas mileage is probably lousy. I’m happy to see a published evaluation that talks about these real-world things that an owner has to live with long after the ink is dry. I’ll do another road test to evaluate the negative points raised. Give me both Car & Driver and Consumer Reports. Cars can co-exist in both worlds
In a way I do agree with certain points you made about CR, BUT the truth of the matter is that a company who dedicates itself on a wide variety of points in different product categories, will tend to miss the key elements of what makes a car great or garbage. I still have yet to hear why they made such a comparison like previously mentioned. - That alone tells me they missed a 'key' element.
Wouldn't get another M, might get a C -- he also has a BMW X5 and had before the M a 5 series BMW.
The issue both he and my wife stipulate is "dealer treatment" -- which at a regional 5 star dealership would be at best a B-.
I guess you "gets what you pays for" -- maybe a 300C represented and serviced by an Acura or Lexus or BMW dealer would cost another $10,000.
Maybe I am kidding myself. My co-worker admonishes me that it has taken decades for the Premium guys to get where they are -- and it will likely be decades before almost any reasonable Chrysler dealer will [be able to] "rise to the occasion"
I still want to test a 300C AWD -- but I am beginning to think that the Acura and the Audi dealer personnel "get it" -- maybe even the Cadillac folks get it, but it must be too much to expect at this time from a Chrysler dealer.
I like the simple life -- where the customer is treated well after the sale -- my co worker gets that from his BMW dealer and I get it from my Audi dealer.
It may seem odd (and unheard of in C&D or R&T) to rank a 300 C against a vehicle like an Avalon. However, when you consider it by size - particularly interior size- it makes some sense. Speaking from personal experience, my wife drives a current generation Avalon because she wanted a car with a roomy interior and didn't want an SUV. At the time the Avalon seemed like the obvious choice. If the 300C had been available at that time, it would certainly been considered and, knowing my wife's penchant for fast driving, probably chosen. In her case, comparing these "large cars" makes plenty of sense.
On the other hand, this comparison doesn't work so well for me. I am interested in what most would consider a sports sedan so size is a secondary consideration. That's why I find myself comparing the 300C against something like a 3-series BMW. Size-wise it is an invalid comparison, but for performance it is quite appropriate. Because I am not looking for a particularly sized car, their choice of cars which were ranked aganist the 300C is not so interesting to me. However, their test data and their opinions about the car remain worthy of consideration, in my opinion.
Took delivery yesterday of a second vehicle, a 2005 Colorado LS with the standard Z85 suspension, and even though it is a 4 wheel drive truck, it has a notably smoother more pleasant ride than the Chrysler 300. I like my 300C well enough to keep it for its other myriad attributes, but the ride is definitely disappointing.
If cars are your number one interest in life as they are in mine, you select them as you would your wife. You go for the one you love, and then for lasting pleasure of it, you overlook the flaws.
CR people are a bunch of pansies who care more about cupholders than vehicle performance, even when reviewing performance cars. What a joke.
The Colorado, like most GM trucks, has a pretty mushy suspension, so of course it's going to ride "smoothly". Want a large car w/ similar pricing and an cloud-like ride? Buy a Town Car.
Wow! No truer or more accurate words have ever been spoken for a true car enthusiast. I'm gonna have to use that as a signature statement in another forum!
Nobody, and I mean nobody, works harder at getting it right, doing valid comparisons, and most importantly, using REPEATABLE test procedures than CU. I know from experience that if they praise the handling or ride of a car, when I drive that car, I'll agree. If they criticize, I'll usually agree after a thorough test drive.
As for their "lack of car enthusiasm", or whatever the alleged crime is here, I can tell you that in the past 15 years or so, their automotive testing editors have pretty much the same biases as the rest of us - they value handling, good brakes, comfortable interiors, and they tell it like it is when a car sacrifices "enthusiast" values for comfort alone - read the test on the Amanti carefully.
What did they say? That the 300C in particular rides more firmly than the Touring, and can be harsh and occasionally noisy. Yep. That it's hard to see out of that squashed greenhouse. Yep on that too. That the trunk doesn't have as much room as the 500. Yep.
And the Avalon as competition? If you READ what they had to say about the Avalon, it is clear that they don't consider it an "enthusiast" choice - just happens to be the best value in the class, if you take into account EVERYTHING they use as criteria, of which handling and such are just part of the equation. And that's before the new Avalon arrives on the scene. Does an Avalon interest most people interested in a 300? Probably not, but that doesn't make their observations and ratings invalid.
Every time CU publishes something that doesn't praise some particular vehicle to the skies, a firestorm erupts on sites like this one. Like having your favorite child evaluated realistically by the teacher? "Johnny can't always do his sums, turns in the homework late, likes to skip out occasionally, but he's a terrific football player..."
http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_muscle_economy_ways/index.htm
But then I prefer a firm suspension. I've owned and enjoyed driving Fiat Spyders, an MX-6, and in recent years two different E-class sedans. It may be that some folks really don't like a firm suspension and to them the firmness is exaggerated as compared to their previous rides.
putting the 300C below the Avalon, Park Avenue, Maxima and Ford 500.
You can say anything you like about how they nitpick a vehicle effectively or whatever, but any publication that suggests buying a Ford 500 over the 300C is NOT on my reading list. The only way this suggestion happens is by completely removing all enthusiast criteria because the 500 is the epitome of boring and playing it safe. I, for one, don't even care that the 300C is the one below the Ford 500, or Park avenue for that matter, its the fact that a couple of boring cars (once again, APPLIANCES) top the list AT ALL.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I do consider the 300C to ride firm but comfortable but I can't say it's "harsh". What are you going to expect from a performance luxury sedan? You want soft? Drive a Lincoln....
Note: Firm + overinflated tires = harsh.
Since CR 'buys' their cars from dealers (like someone mentioned), then chances are those tires were overinflated and overlooked when testing was done... um.. wait... that's a "key" element!
Oh.. and appliances vs. enthusiast cars doesn't seem like apples to apples. No matter how much praise you give CR, their rated reviews (regardless of what car you're talking about) are not of any significance to the majority of car enthusiast because they just "miss it". One out of all the reviews that are out there claims that the 300C is subpar to those tested or even considered to compare to those mentioned. The 300C is compared to higher standard vehicles, like the Audi, BMW and MB, and they get their share of spanking. The 300C is not glorified, but it's respected for what it offers and for the price. I'll trash any car, but give credit where it's due.
You want to have it all, then I suggest making your own car.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Consumer's Reports certainly is able to report factual information clearly. No issue there.
Personally, I do not find their prose able to get to the essence of driving a car -- sure they can tell you it will stop in 172 feet or accelerate in 5.9 seconds or whatever. But their style does not lend itself to describing well the "feel" of the experience.
Perhaps we are making mountains out of molehills -- perhaps their ratings do sway buyers away or towards a car.
They certainly march to the tune of. . .
And there is nothing wrong with that.
However, I find their "analysis" of cars to be "less helpful" with respect to the attributes that make me "cough up" a medium sized 5 figure number. They will, certainly, keep printing their auto reports -- I will, certainly, keep ignoring them.
But, I could be wrong, in doing so -- it is a risk I'm willing to take.
stephen
I apologize for complaining about the ride quality. The 300C is a lot of car for the money and I really love it. I just wish DC would consider a Chrysler Imperial 300 model that would still feature the hemi but also a more comfortable ride by adding magnetic ride control. And price it $2500 extra so everybody could get excited next year again about more car for the money.
stephen
I think you summed it up. It's a matter of expectations. If someone sees a 300C and then later test drives one expecting a Town Car-like disconnected feel, then they were probably not in the 300C's demographic to begin with.
I could probably find someone who thinks a Crown Vic with the upgraded LX suspension (picking a random example) rides "harsh." That thing's a soggy marshmallow.
Here are my list of complaints:
1. Great style, but wont last long---Yes, we love the looks of the 300 now, but just give it maybe three years down the road and you will see that it will become just another car as far as style is concerned. Besides, with it priced so affordably, you will have individuals that dont take care of their vehicles, neglect it...
2. Cheap interior---Even on the most expensive trim levels, the evidence of cost cutting is obvious. The materials on the upper areas of dash and doors are sadly, hard plastic. Leather seating areas, but loads of vinyl materials on on the rest of the seats. That headliner looks awful and is an eye sore. Carpeting is very thin and gives me feet tension from riding in it for more than 30 minutes.
3. Value--Yeah, great prices, but the depriciation will be catastrophic to owners...lol
My aunt and uncle just purchased this vehicle with all the options and they think that it is just an amazing vehicle. I wont tell them, but it is a poor vehicle made by an unrespected maker. As for me, a Mercedes is built, engineered, drives, and handles miles better. You are instantly and genuinely reminded of what a true luxury car is (Mercedes E500). And the image of the Mercedes brand adds impact, respect to my image as a person of better class and taste. The Chrysler 300: Absolutely not. Its a joke. I work in an area in Dallas, Texas (Turtle Creek) where most of the folks (working professionals) drive mostly Bimmers, Porsches, Mercedes, and Jaguar. Imagine someone driving up in the 300C, lol...It doesnt belong in our world of finer things, even though it poses cheaply as a luxury car.
My point: The 300C is a car for folks that want to pretend to have a real luxury cruiser. But cant afford it.
Best Regards,
Shipo
When it comes to Mercedes and Ferrari makes vs. Chrysler brands, there are two kinds of people. The generic car owners who admire the upscale brands and wish they could afford the better car, then the upscale owners who are the objets of envy...they are the privileged few who are admired....lol
Best Regards,
Shipo
You praise MB as if it's the glorious, untouchable brand. Meanwhile, look at the reputation of MB and the realibility; it's hasn't gone up, just down. Audi.. another big disappointment. The only thing that's saving BMW is their customer service and their dealers, because their 'new' design models are barfable!
You come in here trolling about the 300C. It's not the fact that people who own one can't afford a MB, Audi or BMW for that matter. I can get those vehicle without a problem. I already mentioned the reasons why I don't have one and BMW is just an overpriced brand, IMO. So back to Chrysler, just like any other brand, you take chances. Give me ample, comfortable space, performance, handling at a good price and I'll consider it.
You act as if MB, Audi and BMW (or whoever else), started at the top. So now that other car manufacturers are trying to make it there, there's no chance for them. Go ahead and buy your "insert car here" you want; that's why there are other brands that tailor to your tastes. Since you're all about "image" and how people will look at you by what you drive, think about it when you're sitting at the service dept or even better, when the person next to you is driving a 300C and shows alittle of what it can do.
Oh.. and one more thing... let's see how far this 300 design phase lasts... it's kind of moronic to say that designs only last 2-3 years... there's a reason why companies change the designs of their cars. Or did you expect the 300 or PT Cruiser to last 10 yrs with the same design? *rolleyes*. And.... DC owns MB... same company that makes Chrysler and Dodge. So much for superior image huh?!
The engineering and numerous safety, conveience, comfort, and handling features found on a Mercedes is not found on a mere Chrysler.
My goodness, lets get back to reality here. Dont you remember Chrysler and all the lemons of the past, all the freakin recalls, and the numerous quality/reliabilty issues that have had. Is one car going to change all that? I dont think so.
Let's face it....Maybe Chrysler will be an upscale brand one day (100 yrs maybe?) but it sure isnt now.
I have literally seen the lying, hateful, cunning acts of Chrysler dealers, and they simply aren't people I ever want to deal with. Mercedes Benz, however, has always treated with me with respect, courtesy, and I am proud to say Mercedes is a maker I'll always stay with. There's just something about that privileged Mercedes owner. The Chrysler on the other hand, I have seen pimped out with dubbs, ragtops, and ridiculous amounts of more chrome and rims that make it look more like a ganster's car that wouldnt be too welcome in my neighborhood.
So, do yourself a favor everyone, think about the better car...
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I dont like BMW by the way...