Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Sports Wagons - The wave of the future?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Didn't they basically add S-VT to a Ford Duratec block? Higher compression too?
I'm surprised if 87 octane is what's called for.
-juice
Compression is only slightly higher than that of the I4 (10.0:1 v. 9.7:1). They could've squeezed more power and torque out of either engine if they'd upped the compression and fuel requirement, but kept their needs economical. Higher compressions can shorten life spans of engine components anyway.
-juice
Good to know as price differential here in NorCal is obscene (about 30-cents/gal difference - that's what, $4 per tank?!). Regular unlead was a factor when my wife and I were choosing SUVs - I think it's going to be same for this car too. Point Mazda!
I did not know, however, that the mirrors aren't designed to break away (what do they do then, just BREAK?!)...
Even the lowly 1978 Hondas had foldable mirrors...
Also, no toe space under the front seats made the back seat feel tighter than it is.
-juice
Despite my long loyalty to Chrysler, I would not buy a Pacifica, Crossfire, Magnum, or 300 if their prices were cut in half.
-juice
Pacifica has not sold well. We'll see about the Magnum. I think volume will be lower, but profit margins will be higher.
-juice
Proving only that P.T. Barnum had no idea how right he was.
If what Daimler wants is low-volume, high-margin vehicles, they already have Mercedes. They bought Chrysler specifically to acquire the high-volume, low-margin business they lacked. Now they're abandoning that completely. This is one of the murkiest business strategies I've ever seen.
Thanks!
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
I do see some resemblence between the Magnum and the Hummer, both are overweight and consume too much of every resource. The Hummer has the advantages of a high seating position and ability to ford creeks. The Magnum has very little appeal unless you want to haul (or pull) heavy cargo in something other that a pick up truck.
Right now, the only US marketed manufacturers offering what I consider to be Sport Wagons are. Audi, Subaru, VW, and maybe Volvo.
Jim W.
Which brings me to the new Dodge Magnum and Chrysler 300. It is obvious to me that the stylists who produced these bodies are hell-bent on taking the same obnoxious direction that their truck designers have been taking - big, upright front ends instead of sloping, aerodynamic ones. Windshields that are closer to vertical (Hummer style) than sleekly laid back for reduced wind drag. High, brawny slab-sided bodysides with tiny window areas (again, like the Hummers), instead of big glass areas for better visibility.
IMO, these styling directions are misguided, mistaken, and will lead straight to disaster in the marketplace for Daimler-Chrysler if they show up on more and more of the company's newest products. I do not buy cars that make me look like a beer-swilling logger or longshoreman.
The Chryler 300, on the other hand, takes numerous styling cues from current Rolls Royce and Bentley models. From the flat faced front, large grille, and slab-sided panels, it is obvious they were going for the high-end luxury look at an affordable price. The 300 will take some getting used to. The biggest objection I have with the photos of the 300 I have seen is the atrocious wheel and tire package on the base V6 model. Too small and too cheap looking.
-juice
Compared to the elegance of the 300M it replaces, only the drivetrain seems a truly significant improvement to me.
BTW, I find it hard to think of the Magnum as a sport wagon. To big and too bulky. I think 540it or S6 Avant is about as big as I'd be willing to go and still call it "sport".
However, any addition to the ranks of RWD wagons is welcome I guess...
Grand High Poobah
The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
Head room is OK, surprisingly. Visibility is limited though.
-juice
True, but how much of that was due entirely to the Intrepid's styling compared to those others? None, IMO. The current Intrepid gets my vote as the most stunningly beautiful, ahead-of-its-time 4-door sedan body of all time. I think it is Chrysler's often-deserved reputation for mediocre build quality and reliability issues that has prevented it from selling more cars - not any styling superiority by the competitors. The Daimler-Chrysler 'merger' (read:takeover) was expected to resolve Chrysler's quality issues. Time will tell. However, to retire a group of world-class great-looking body designs and replace them with blocky, squarish, gimmicky Magnum and new-300 shapes is to court disaster.
Rear head room was bad for a car that size, too. Packaging wasn't as good as they led you to believe. Magnum actually has better rear head room, perhaps only because it's a wagon.
-juice
They can call it what they want... wagon, tourer, or even a crossover wagon... I like the looks of it. Finally judgment will be made during a detailed test drive.
Also - you can't say that DC has completely given up on fuel economy just because they design the front ends so they won't end up breaking records in the wind tunnel. Let's all go read about the new Hemi that will be in these cars. --> "The Hemi will feature cylinder deactivation in the 300C version, when it goes on sale in the spring of 2004. The Multi Displacement System (MDS) seamlessly turns off the fuel consumption in four cylinders when V-8 power is not needed. This provides a world class combination of performance and fuel economy." from Allpar.com
If I can get a vehicle with all the options I could want ($4,400 worth), utility of a wagon, the power of a V8 that can do 17city 23highway, and it carries the price of under 34K, well I may just be sold.
Oh... IMO
-juice
2005 Dodge Magnum
Look at the WRX, 2.0l turbo, fast as a banshee when you need it and 20/27 mpg with an LEV rating when you don't.
Beat that with a V8 and DOD. Reliably.
-juice
I still prefer the small engine approach in theory, but they tend to never put in a relaxed top gear (while Vette is about 1,400 rpm @ 60 mph)and that hurts highway MPG.
Of course the AWD hurts the Subaru as well. In FWD form it would do a little better MPG wise.
The 05 legacy is supposed to have better fuel mileage - maybe that will trickle down/over to other models.
I bet if you survey owners the city mileage is in the mid teens at best.
A tall 6th does allow for relatively efficient cruising, though.
-juice
The CTS-V does this as well. But the only way I know of disabling it is to run 1st gear to about 40 mph!!
1st to FOURTH? C'mon, I'd just manually shift to 3rd or something.
-juice
I think starting off in second gear disables/bypasses it as does going from 1 to 3. Never driven a Vette, so I don't know how doable that is.
And great looking? Egad. It's one of the worst-styled bodies from Chrysler Corporation in the last 40 years. Bulky, blunt, non-aerodynamic nose, bolt-upright windshield, tiny sideglass thanks to too-high bodysides, excessive and contrived detailing, and on and on.
I've been a Chrysler fan for decades, but with this new generation, they've completely lost their touch.
Like it or not, the Hemi alone is a big selling point.
Headroom is actually OK, my only problem with them is visibility is poor.
-juice
now you can hear the song on the radio.
Ballistic...let's wait a bit and see. The cubic footage exceeds that of the Intrepid--which is certainly roomy. I own one so I know of what I speak. Having seen a Magnum in person at the Philly auto show--I believe the rear will prove useful for carrying certain items. I am rather a fan of the Intrepids cab-forward styling. Frankly I would have rather seen a new, updated LH chassis, powertrains and transmissions. However, on balance, Mercedes E-class inspiration "ain't too bad". And remember that those blunt looking E-class sedans of the 80's and 90's still had good drag coefficients..
Hide the women & children! JB and I agree on this design fiasco!
Bob
Does the cubic footage calculation take into account that the Magnum is a wagon, and there never was an Intrepid wagon? (sigh, sob, too bad).
I own one so I know of what I speak.
I have a Concorde, and have loved it since day one.
I believe the <Magnum> rear will prove useful for carrying certain items.
No doubt, but what it will hold will certainly be more restricted than if the body shape had been designed form-before-function, instead of style (which, in this case, I intensely dislike)-way-before-function.
I am rather a fan of the Intrepids cab-forward styling. Frankly I would have rather seen a new, updated LH chassis, powertrains and transmissions.
Exactly. If your Intrepid is a late model, it is (IMO) the best-looking 4-door sedan ever built by any automaker. Even the prior generation, like my Concorde, is still very easy on the eyes. Both generations were among the best Chrysler (or anyone else) has ever designed. This new Daimler--influenced stuff is garbage by comparison.
Mercedes E-class inspiration "ain't too bad".
Nothing that looks even slightly like an M-B E-class will ever find its way into my garage.
And that definitely includes the Magnum and the new 300. No more Chrysler products for this long-time Chrysler buyer until they come back to their senses.
-juice