Chrysler 300/300C

maggi · February 2005

Thanks, Jeep .... sorry, what is TPS? Where can I see standard and optional features?

maggi · February 2005

Jeep, the protection group, which includes run flat tires, includes TPS because, of course, if the tires are run flat, a sensor is needed to advise if air pressure is lost.

Where can I find the standard/optional features for the 2006 models?

dkrhardy · February 2005

I'm 99.999% sure that the protection group has the Conti self sealing tires, NOT any sort of run flat tires. The '05 "C" has the protection group as an option, as on mine, and the tires are self sealing. Sort of.

carguy10 · February 2005

Anybody with experience with a 300 RWD in snowy/icy conditions? Does the traction control help enough to consider it without AWD?

pat · February 2005

Hi carguy10, here's a tip for you. If you put "snow" into the Search This Discussion box (on the page bar at the top and the bottom of the page) and hit Search, you'll get links to a whole bunch of posts that may help you. Check them out.

A lot of people don't notice that handy little feature that is so helpful at retrieving useful information already posted.

Have fun!

timcar · February 2005

Don't know, but Car and Driver did an interesting comparison a number of years ago among FWD, RWD, and AWD cars in snow. What they learned is that while AWD works best, and FWD better than RWD, the GREATEST determinant of traction isn't drive configuration, but tires. Cars with AWD and summer tires usually go nowhere in really bad conditions. Conversely, RWD cars with good winter tires will outperform other drive configurations without.

Conti is evidently now making a high quality winter tire in stock 225/60/18. They're pricey, but Tire Rack has them.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tire- Model=ContiWinterContact+TS790+V&vehicleSearch=true&partnum=26VR8- TS790XL&fromCompare1=yes

dkrhardy · February 2005

If you are gonna drive in snow alot, I'd get dedicated winter tires for either one. Where I live, we get some snow a few times a year and the TC works as advertised. I think that the few who report that it doesn't work have actually turned it off. You do not push the button and illuminate the dash light to turn it on .... it defaults to on when you start the car and the dash light (icon) is off.

maggi · February 2005

I'm ordering a 2006 .... where did you find a list of 2006 standard features ( remember, they may decontent the car) and options ... for example, other mention new colors ... I was told there would be light-sensitive glass

Thanks ...

xkss · February 2005

this may have been beaten to death, or not but...

Here is the 1998 Chrysler Chronos concept car:

http://conceptcars.free.fr/images/Chronos_image1.jpg

http://www.allpar.com/cars/concepts/chronos.html

2005 Chrysler 300C SRT-8:

http://fast-autos.net/chrysler/srt8.jpg

http://www.allpar.com/cars/lx/srt8-chrysler.html

Now the 1957 Chrysler 300C:

http://www.allpar.com/cars/chrysler-300c.html

The grilles of both Chryslers (57 and 05) look similar.

Notice the lines in the middle of the 57 and 05 Chrysler's hoods.

Also notice the rectangular taillights of both cars.

The front end styling of the new Chrysler 300 is almost IDENTICAL to the front end styling of the 1998 Chrysler Chronos concept except for the slant of the new one.

The Bentley Arnage...

"Named for one of the most challenging corners on the Le Mans racing circuit, the Arnage was fittingly introduced at the French circuit in April of 1998." from autos.msn.com

Oh, and the 300C is awesome!

In a sea of bland cars, the 300C is one BAD-ACE American muscle/luxo sedan!

And the Dodge Magnum RT reminds me of a hot rod!

jo158 · February 2005

Hi
I have posted to the other site information on snow tires. I have a 300 Limited and put 4 Blizzak snow tires on it and it has done great except for one very icy morning I could not get up a hill. It seems with the traction control, the engine feels like it almost cuts out.
Good luck

acco20 · February 2005

There are times when you will do better with the traction control OFF. In this instance, you would probably would have made the hill with the system deactivated.Another example would be if you feel it is necessary to "rock" the car. I do not think it is possible unless the traction control is off.Hope this helps.......

jo158 · February 2005

Thanks I appreciate the suggestion/info. My previous car was a FWD Volvo S80 so this is a very different driving experience.

randy · February 2005

On Saturday I was going up a steep snowy hill with a set of Blizak's on the rear when an old Jeep suckered me in behind him. It turned out that he only had rear wheel drive, where I initially thought he had 4 wheel drive. As he began to slip and lose traction I was coming on to him and started to pass. However, the ESP would only let me crawl, no matter how much gas I gave the engine. There was a car coming down the hill, over a rise and this guy in the rear wheel drive jeep and I were going neck and neck. Finally, I got by him before the car opposite me passed. It was an interesting experience. I never thought of disconnecting the ESP, which might have given me throttle response, but the action could have made me slip. (It would have been a tough call). It was a unique experience, not to hear the engine as you are pushing the gas peddle to the floor.

shipo · February 2005

My last two cars have had a traction control system that would override the throttle position given enough wheel slip. Given that I drive a manual transmission, the feeling was really strange when I first encountered it, which was in first gear where the throttle transients are quite significant. Turning off the traction control can help however, I've experimented with that a bit, and you need to be on-guard so as to be able to keep the tail of your car behind the front of your car. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

dkrhardy · February 2005

Only on the rear? Consider your ability to turn and stop also. Those tires are recommended on all 4 corners because of turning and stopping. I would experiment with the TC off technique in an area free of cars and solid objects! :-) These cars will bring the rear end out on DRY pavement if you hit the gas hard with TC off. Good luck to ya!

phily99 · February 2005

Some tips for you snow bunnies
1. If you don't know how to drive in snow use ESP
or better yet stay home.
2. If you do know how to drive in snow shut off
ESP and stay alert to what the cars doing.
3. AWD with snow or A/T tires are best. W/O snow
or A/T's 2nd best.
4. RWD with snows or A/T ok (4 position better
then 2, W/O them stay home.
5. With RWD if you have to drive PUT SOME WEIGHT
IN THE TRUNK ! ! 200# will do nicely, sand
bags, kitty litter, your MIL.
6. Yes a FWD car will GO better than RWD but a RWD
will STOP better. Just drop your gears down.
Try that with a FWD (360)! !
7. The weight over the drive wheels, gradual
Accel & Decel, tire tread & common sense are
the snow driving keys.
8. And finally (not to bore you anymore) take the
car to an empty parking lot in the snow and do
some 360's, starts, stops, etc. I did just
that with my 300 and with original tires,
weight in the trunk it does fine in the
snow. Also looks great.

bdyment · February 2005

Why in the world would a dealer want to power flush an engine with only 17k on it?

Have you had any problems with the engine?

Sounds like a dealer get rich scheme to me.

shipo · February 2005

Agreed.

Somehow I suspect that if one checks the Owners' Manual, they would find that no such maintenance is recommended or required. Unless the dealership can show a document from DC (such as a service bulletin) explicitly spelling out such a maintenance procedure, then it is a "Dealer get rich scheme."

Best Regards,
Shipo

Kirstie_H · February 2005

A magazine reporter is looking to photograph an Edmunds.com user and his/her car in Northern California by Friday, March 4, 2005. If you are in the area and care to participate, please reply to jfallon@edmunds.com with the name of your city as well as the month and year when you bought your most recent car after researching it on Edmunds.com.

biglescobar · February 2005

I just ordered an 06 300C with AWD but dont really like the rims that come with the AWD models too much, is there anyplace i can order just the chromeclad rims that come with the standard RWD? the dealership said they can't do anything and all the ones i see on ebay come with the tires, i just need the rims, thanks alot, drop me a line if you know of anywhere to get them...

maggi · February 2005

For Rims, try Wykoff-mopar-parts or check the messages in accessories forum ...

How did you find out standard features and options for '06 models? I've ordered an '06 but we're guessing at '05 options ...

wnichols · February 2005

You might want to check previous posts; I believe I read somewhere (here or another 300 or Dodge Magnum site) that the RWD wheels will not work on the AWD cars due to different offsets. Somebody else may know more...

biglescobar · February 2005

after reading all the reviews on here of the RWD with traction control working fine in the snow, i just called the dealer and told him I'll take that instead, its cheaper, and this way I get the wheels , and I can still drive it in snow and if its more than a few inches on the ground i wouldnt drive no matter what car i have anyways, either way its gotta be better than my current clk320 in the snow which is terrible

snowy · February 2005

Did you try joining Costco and buying through them?

I bought a 300C AWD via the Costco program at invoice plus $500. Drove one with the protection group and adjustable pedals off the lot for a shade under $35K, including MASS 5% sales tax and after $1K financing rebate. The car showed up 3 weeks ago (9 weeks after I ordered it) and it's been great!

fuzzywuzzy · February 2005

Most "dealer recomended" servies are to make the dealer $$. There's no way you would need any type of engine flush with only 17k miles on the clock. In fact why are you doing anything at a dealer? They are such a rip off. A good quailty shop, (not those POS jiffy lube monkeys) can do just as good service without the dealer price.

hickory · February 2005

I posted on the pricing board, and it was suggested that I post over here.

Anyone know the "new" colors and/or features that will be available on the 2006 300C AWD?

I'm ready to buy a car (but not desperate) and am thinking about pre-ordering a 2006, but would like to know the scoop on what will be out there. (I don't really like any of the current colors, but will live with Brilliant Black if necessary. And, of course, I'm interested in new offerings - or deletions! - to the vehicle for 2006.)

Thanks.

Hickory

markcincinnati · February 2005

http://www.arifleet.com/production.html

dogpound · March 2005

I just purchase my new 300c on Feb 15. and it is in the shop already. On the first start up in the morning the trans. would make a hard shift into first. When stop I hit the gas and it would not start to move until it got to 2500 rpms. The dealer said that a couple of sensors are bad. Just wanted to see if anybody else had the same problem.

beach15 · March 2005

Here's the official list of '06 changes:

2006 MY changes - Chrysler 300 & Dodge Magnum/Charger

COLORS
-Cool Vanilla limited to retail units (not available for Fleet)
-Stone White added as Fleet Only availability
-Silver Steel Metallic Clear Coat replaces Mineral Grey
-Deep Lava Red replaced by Linen Gold Metallic Pearl Coat

EXTERIOR
-Performance Appearance Group content added to Magnum SXT (Bright Grille Inserts, Bodyside Molding with Bright Insert, Fog Lamps, Body-colored Folding Heated Mirrors, 3.5L High Output Engine badge, Bright Headlamp Bezels)
-Performance Appearance Group option dropped
-Fender Molding Dropped from Magnum SXT's
-300 Touring/Limited Bodyside Moldings changed to RT design
-300 Touring/Limited, SXT Exterior Mirrors changed from folding to fixed (Magnum, Charger SXT)

INTERIOR
-Fold-flat Front Passenger Seat (Late Introduction, Magnum/Charger SXT, RT)
-Rear Door Ash Receivers removed from Smoker's Package
-Auto/Auto graphic added to sunroof switch (commonization)
-SXT/RT get Ash Receiver Door with Chrome Accent
-SXT (Leather)/RT get Satin Silver lower steering wheel spokes
-SXT/RT gets new Center Stack Bezel - Satin Silver (Magnum/Charger SXT/RT)
-Boston Acoustics badge added to mirror flag door trim

FUNCTIONAL
-New Tire Pressure Monitor Warning (300 Touring/Limited)
-New Tire Pressure Monitor Display (300C)
-Optional DVD Video Entertainment System in Center Console (Magnum/Charger SXT, RT)
-AM/FM/CD Radio (REF) gets Auxiliary Audio Input Jack
-Seat Belt Alert added
-SXT RWD new 17" Machined Aluminum Wheel (Magnum, Charger SXT)
-300 Touring new 17" Machined Aluminum Wheel (300 Touring)
-RT 18" Aluminum Wheel made optional on RWD SXT's (Magnum, Charger SXT)
-3.5L Engine RWD Models get W5A580 Transmission (Sept 2005, 300 Touring, Limited)
-2.7L Engines receive Variable Line Pressure (VLP) Transmissions (300, Magnum/Charger SE)
-Auto Headlamps & Express-up Windows added to Convenience Grp II (Magnum RT)

OTHER
-New Police Packages (Magnum, Charger)
-Charger Daytona Package (Charger RT)
-New SRT-8 models (6.1L Hemi & WA580 AS trans, 20x9.0 wheels, Magnum/Charger)
-Fleet Safety Convenience Group (300, Magnum/Charger SE)
-All Dodge Models get Hood Props, Chrysler models get Gas Props
-Cold Weather Group replaced by Engine Block Heater
-Optional Comfort/Convenience Group added to 300 Touring(includes: Power Passenger Seat, Heated Seats, Express up/down Windows)

So actually quite a few things, the 5-speed auto being added to ALL 3.5L engines being one of the most significant (though it will be a late intro in September).

maggi · March 2005

Hi Beach .... where did you find ththe 2006 changes? My dealer cannot find them ...

Thanks

louiss · March 2005

beach15-

great list...thanks. No chance that they are changing the headrests? I found the forward angle on the 300 to be uncomfortable, and the fact that the angle can't be adjusted to be annoying.

I would have already bought a 300c if it had adjustable headrest angles (am worried about a stiff neck) and more wood on the dash.

john_a · March 2005

I ordered my 2006 300C yesterday and my dealer said they no longer offer the dark slate gray/ medium slate gray interior color. Apparently it has been replaced by dark slate gray/ light slate gray. Is this just a name change, or did they actually change the color?

Also, to anyone considering the rear seat video, I saw this option at the auto show and it raises the height of the center console so it is not level with the door armrest. Make sure you try it before you buy!

velostic · March 2005

Erm, actually even Chrysler says that the 300 is pretty much the 300M with a new body. I own a 300M and drove the 300 and that is what it seemed to me - only the 6 banger 300 is notably slower because it's the same engine with a larger body.

Regardless, I have a story of caution that applies to both models as well as any Chrysler.

Chryslers may look great, but are all gong and no dinner. I have under 20K miles on my 300M. The car is currently in the shop for the following reasons:

* The rack and pinion needs to be replaced
* The transmission is leaking
* Water mysteriously appears on the carpets when it rains.
* The engine runs super rough.
* The suspension creaks like an old car.

Chrysler find none of these problems surprising. They have called me several times in the past week, to tell me that I allegedly need something else that is not in the warranty. For a car that is having the above problems at under 20K miles, I would hope for a little more love - maybe even some of the alleged non-warranty problems comped - not gouging me for more money. Allegedly, no one can "do anything about it."

My warranty dictates that I get a rental while the car in in the shop, which is now over a week. Let's just say I am driving around a car of far lesser value and not happy about it. Chrysler tell me that's the way it's going to be and there's "nothing they can do about it."

Do what you will, but I will never buy a Chrysler again. The 300 may look like a poor man's Bentley, but don't be fooled by it's pretty face.

coby03 · March 2005

velostic,

Chrysler may not be the greatest, especially some of the so-called 5 star dealers, but the 300 series has generally been a winner for them. I've leased two of them (a 1999 and most recently a 2002 300M Special) and have had very few problems. They have been excellent cars and I still like the look of them a little better than the 300C.

I test drove the 300C RWD and AWD versions recently and checked them over pretty closely. They bear very little resemblance to the previous 300M versions. From the interior, exterior, and drivetrains, I couldn't see any similarity between the old and new. It seems that maybe your experience has tainted your impression. As bad as it's been, and I can sympathize with what you're going through, it is not typical of 300M's in general nor is it a fair representation of the 300C. Just my 2 cents.

smithed · March 2005

I like the 300 and am close to ordering a C, so don't take this the wrong way. It's made by a German company and assembled in Canada where a Mexican engine (HEMI) is installed. Talk about outsourcing!

intrepidspirit · March 2005

coby,

I agree. My wife and I are both on our second 300M's (my 2000 was leased and my wife's 2001 was totalled). The only major problem in 36,000 to 38,000 miles of driving with the first 2 was a main computer failure on my 2000 which was repaired under warranty. Other minor issues (crack in dash, speaker replacement, etc.) were all repaired under warranty. Both of our 2003 M's have been trouble free.

From the postings on Edmund's over the years, it appears the 300 has had more problems as a first year model than the 300M did. However, for everyone that reports a problem, there are probably 50 others that are completely satisfied that we never hear from...

bigelm · March 2005

That applies to everything else in the auto market... Hondas and Toyotas made in the US. I can go on and on but the point is that Japanese aren't really Japanese and American aren't really American and European aren't really European...

You get my point!

timcar · March 2005

Have you heard of any additional interior choices? Sound systems?

TIA

velostic · March 2005

Coby

Thank you for your thoughts. I am glad to hear that you have had good luck, and would dearly like to say I am an exception and things will probably work out. But the recent events have motivated me to go out of my way to ask around - quite a bit.

Everyone, bar none, that I have asked who has owned a Chrysler will never go back. Every mechanic I've asked has rolled their eyes and every owner has a tale of woe. Suffice to say, I have found that I am clearly not alone in being price gouged and/or treated like a second class citizen.

Today, I was told I might be able to pick up my car tomorrow with dodgy front brakes unless I paid $250 - which would bring the total of items that supposedly need repairs that are not covered by warranty to over $600 for a car with less than 20K miles. A supervisor was supposed to call me today to deal with my complaints - I was told he was "too busy" to speak with me.

I understand that whenever Chrysler are threatened with news cameras (of which I have heard a couple stories), they back off of this kind of behavior. Maybe they are trying it on because I'm female - but I was raised in a car family and know this is BS.

coby03 · March 2005

velostic,

Have you tried to call Chrysler corporate office in Michigan? One of the few problems I had early on was with brakes and the so-called 5 star dealer refused to cover the warranty repair because "they've done too many brake jobs". I heard this from the service manager as well as the owner of that particular dealership. I called Chrysler and they agreed to reimburse me for repairs made elsewhere (and I told them I would not go into that dealership again based on their attitude). The dealers are still struggling, which is kind of sad because I do think the new 300C is a great car, like I still believe the 300M was.

Look at the passion and involvement that 300M owners have had over the past several years as witnessed on this site alone. Go into the 300M sedan forum and read what people have said. I think they were one of the most active forums on Edmunds with over 25,000 posted messages. Most are pretty happy with Chrysler, but have all had to deal with problems of some sort. These things do break, I just wish the service organizations at the dealers would hold up their end of the bargain a little better. Have faith!

dkrhardy · March 2005

Please check your facts and their source. The '05 300 is not even related to the prior 300's. LH vs LX contains a world of change. Except for the V6 engines and the auto trans on the V6, which by-the-way now sit all in a line front to back, I don't think any thing else is shared. FWD vs RWD makes for profound changes.

billod · March 2005

Hello Snowy,
Where is the dealer in Mass that offered the 300C at invoice + $500. I'm in Conn and am interested in a 300C Hemi AWD. There is only one Costco dealer in Conn, in Danbury, and he is not dealing. Please advise.

smithed · March 2005

I know what you mean. After all BMWs are assembled here in South Carolina. World marketplace, isn't it?

rmorse83 · March 2005

I don't know if I'm the only one that feels this way, but I'm really disappointed in Chrysler's designs over the last few years. I think '99 was possibly the best design year for Chrysler and if you look at their sales figures, it was also their biggest year for profits. The introduction of the 300M, the Jeep Grand Cherokee redesign, the Dodge Durango, which was just introduced in '98 and was still selling like mad, were just all great designs. Not to mention the fact that Chrysler had the Sebring convertible design from '96 that still looked beautiful. I've owned three Chrysler vehicles now and I used to be so impassioned about their designs, and actually would even defend Chrysler's nagging quality problems, that I, myself experienced, in one of my Sebrings, when the electrical system just failed with under 40K miles on it. It used to be that I could defend the quality problems by stating how Chrysler has such awesome style, that because the designs are so cool, you can look past that. Recently, I've felt that I've just lost interest in everything Chrysler has to offer. Chrysler was the last American automobile company that actually caught your eye on the road. Their designs were, for a time, the best on the road. Now, however, things have changed. Chrysler first redesigned the Sebring convertible which was ok, but definitely not as fluid as the previous model. Then they redesigned the Dodge Ram, notably, the only redesign that actually looks better. Then came the redesign for the Dodge Durango, which has to be the worst follow up for a vehicle I've ever seen, repellent! The redesign of the Jeep Grand Cherokee is dismal, and a definite step backward compared to what they brought to the public offering in '99. After, much anticipation, and crossing my fingers that maybe Chrysler would come out with something that would exemplify Chrysler style, their flagship sedan, the 300 series, they do the redesign and we're left with this, the 300. I'm not saying that the redesign of the 300 is bad, because honestly it's not, but seriously it's like everything else on the road, another box. It's such a letdown when compared with the jaw dropping design of the 300M. Chrysler, yet again has missed the mark, and now we're left with a design that is distinct, which is why most people are buying it I assume, but on the same token, not very "pretty" and overly bland. The 300 looks to me like a rehashed Mercedes, very square, very boring. The 300M, was classy and smooth. It was a beautiful vehicle, with wonderful interior elements such as an electroluminescent instrument cluster that set the industry standard for "cool" factor, that other car companies, have since then imitated, and an exterior that made one stare and just think to themselves, "I want that." Now all the redesigns are just painful to look at, and I'm forced to conclude that the last great American automotive company has died, and in place of it we have MB with its boxy designs and people actually thinking they are cool. If you already didn't know, the 300 is a E series Mercedes derivative and after looking at it, one can finally conclude that Chrysler is going down a very Mercedes influenced path with its styling, yet trying to stand out, even if that means having loud designs that don't necessarily look better than the models their replacing. The redesigns at Chrysler have been sacrilege, and this final nail in the coffin 300 is just a testament as to why I won't be expecting anything worthwhile from Chrysler anytime soon. Maybe Chrysler could take note from companies like Lexus when doing redesigns. When you have something that works, why try to "fix" it? Lexus has made their hot cars evolutionary, more so than revolutionary and people have responded positively. Their redesign of the RX300 to the RX330 was flawless, and undeniably better. Although, its design is not that much different, it still is Lexus's #1 seller. Designs don't have to be drastically different in order to gain market share. Maybe Chrysler should start concentrating more on reliability and less on design because they seemed to have had 1 of the 2 in recent years and now, and now as it seems, both evade them. Chrysler has thrown everything away and is starting from scratch with almost every new vehicle launch, when in my opinion they really don't, nor should have to. Just my thoughts, and for all of the 300 owners who are enthusiasts, I don't think the 300 is a bad looking vehicle, I just feel the 300M had "something" deep under it's sheetmetal, almost a soul, that just isn't there with the 300. Later...

shipo · March 2005

Hmmm, different strokes for different folks. I too am a Mopar enthusiast, have been since the mid 1960s (errr, with the exception of things like the Aspen and Volare). Like you, I have also enjoyed the different bent on styling that Chrysler has always seemed to be able to give to their cars. Having said that, while I instantly liked the 300M, I felt it was a little too generic looking for my tastes. Now however comes the new 300/300C and while I admittedly didn't like it when I first saw it, I have grown very fond of its look. In fact, I like it so much that I'm considering a 300C for my next car. If I do get it, it would be the first new car I've ever bought with an automatic transmission (I'm on my tenth car with three pedals), as I have always considered being saddled with a slushbox a fate worse than death. In the end a car with a stick will probably win out, but the fact that I'm even considering it is something.

Regarding the 300 being an E-Class derivative, ummm, well maybe you and I have different definitions of the term. While it is true that there are a number of components that were sourced from the W210 E-Class parts bin (most notably the transmission for the Hemi cars and the rear suspension), it is not (IMHO) an E-Class derivative. What it is, is a distinctly American car with a few proven components from Germany, which helped keep the development costs down (and hopefully the reliability up).

As for "Soul", well, once again we differ, to my mind, the 300C has WAY more soul than the 300M ever had. While we are on the subject, don't get me started about Lexus, a company that produces soul-less cars if there ever was one. RX300? Ugh!

Best Regards,
Shipo

bdyment · March 2005

You might have a good point, if I could read it,

Paragraphs--Please.

hardhawk · March 2005

To each his own. I greatly prefer the design of the 300 and Magnum vs. the bland generic jelly bean look of the 300M. But hey, that's why they make different vehicles. The Durango isn't as good looking as the old model, but it is sure one heck of an SUV instead of a slightly taller jelly bean that won't do 85% of what I need an SUV to do (like be able to tow something!), which is the case for the RX330. If you want a small wagon with AWD and not much room or cargo capacity, then the Lexus is your ride. If you need room and the ability to tow, the the Durango wins hands down. It all boils down to personal preferences and that's why we are so lucky to live in the US where we can all get what we want!

kevm14 · March 2005

Regarding the 300M, you said:
and an exterior that made one stare and just think to themselves, "I want that."

That's funny. Because everytime I look at a 300M, I think to myself "Ugh, an LH-car." In fact, I've never had a very high opinion of the 300M. Poor resale, power-sapping automatic, FWD and reliablity problems keep me from respecting the car at all. Plus, styling wise, it's like comparing a Ford Taurus to a Jaguar XJ-8 (at least it is for me).

The 300 looks to me like a rehashed Mercedes, very square, very boring. The 300M, was classy and smooth

Also funny. Ever see a black 300C in person (not at a dealer)? I have, and it stands out in a classy way that a 300M never did, imo. The 300M, imo, blends in while the 300C says "premium luxury car." Maybe that's because I was always biased, knowing the 300M was just an LH-car.

Their redesign of the RX300 to the RX330 was flawless, and undeniably better.

I thought the clear tail lights of the RX330 were undeniably ugly personally. Different strokes.....

markcincinnati · March 2005

Although I am scolded over on the Cadillac STS forum for such blasphemy, I agree, the 300C is a [near] premium luxury car.

I think the car magazines should test the 300C fully loaded against an STS. Heck test the RWD and AWD variants while they're at it and even have a sidebar testing the SRT-8.

Some of the folks think I "B nuts" for even suggesting such a thing. Frankly the STS is very nice and it is more refined than the 300C -- but, unless there is a stack of money totalling at least $10,000 in the glove compartment of the Cadillac, I think -- today -- Cadillac is just over-valued. You'd think they were "the standard of the world" again.

The 300C may end up 5 years from now proving the Cadillac aficionados right -- but I sat in both of these cars at a recent Auto Show and although I guess the Cadillac seemed a bit "classier" -- the 300C is competitive with the STS price not a factor and has a leg up over the Cadillac when evaluated including a weighting based on MSRP.

The 300C AWD pretty much fully loaded is $42,000+, the STS AWD, conversely, was about $62,000 -- where is it (or at least $10,000 of it) hidden (in the Cadillac, that is)?

Just an observation.

rmorse83 · March 2005

Regarding the 300M
Plus, styling wise, it's like comparing a Ford Taurus to a Jaguar XJ-8 (at least it is for me).

Nice comparison considering that it is totally flawed. 300M and 300C were targeted towards the same income levels. Also, just to note the XJ-8 is further putting Jaguar in the red, they are actually restructuring and Ford doesn't know what to do now. Jaguars are junky, especially since the introduction of the X-type, now everybody can afford the cars, it has lost it's prestige. But I'm not going to touch that one any further.

The 300M spoke through sales numbers, as did all the other models when they were in their hay day. Like I stated, Chrysler sales were unbelievable in '99 and the 300M in particular, was selling like mad. The 8-cylinder is overkill, as is the opting for rear wheel drive. I live in Michigan, and rear wheel drive is a joke, the all wheel drive model will be coming soon, but seriously, performance doesn't help on a base model when you go spinning off into oncoming traffic in cold, wet, snowy conditions.

The 300 looks to me like a rehashed Mercedes, very square, very boring. The 300M, was classy and smooth

Also funny. Ever see a black 300C in person (not at a dealer)? I have, and it stands out in a classy way that a 300M never did, imo. The 300M, imo, blends in while the 300C says "premium luxury car." Maybe that's because I was always biased, knowing the 300M was just an LH-car.

I have actually see the 300C in person and it is just as boring in person. I even test drove it and felt the interior was clean, but also overly plain. Furthermore, if you really look at the 300 it's a Bentley wannabe, a vehicle trying to be something it's not. It's not classy, just blah, but I guess that's what people are looking for now. Premium luxury car, please. Chrysler is Chrysler, and a Mercedes is a Mercedes. 'Nuf said.

Their redesign of the RX300 to the RX330 was flawless, and undeniably better.

I thought the clear tail lights of the RX330 were undeniably ugly personally. Different strokes.....

One aspect of an overall well executed design.

I guess it all comes down to personal preference, and all the people in this forum will be biased towards saying the new 300 is better because they will most likely, or have bought one. So cheers to everybody, and like everybody keeps saying, "Different strokes, for different folks."

Chrysler 300/300C

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles