YACT: AutoWeek gets their hands on a Chrysler 300C

[Rent]

Originally posted by: Ornery
It might be a fair price, but it won't fly off the lot at that price. Hell, Ford still doesn't seel many Crown Vics or G. Marquis' at $22,000. Used to be the norm. :brokenheart:

Thats because the Crown Vic and its brother are boring as hell. They have no attitude. Thats not saying they're not nice cars, but not many people like driving cars that put them to sleep.

 

[Ornery]

I'm just looking for the run of the mill, family truckster, to be a V8, 4dr, body on frame, RWD sedan for $20,000, rather than these damn minivans and little SUVs. You can always throw a spoiler and ground effects on there to give it that pseudo race car look, for the schmucks who are into that.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

but consider the Oldsmobile Intrigue didn't sell as well as it should have because it had the 3800 instead of a DOHC V6. Nothing was wrong with the engine, and it went head to head with the Camry and came out ahead (I have a Car and Driver comparison test at home I can bring up). But people were looking for labels, whether they were important or not.

You think the reason the Camry outsold the Intrigue was because of the way they named the engine? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

I think it probably had more to do with
a) Toyota/import reliability
b) Oldsmobile's lack of brand identity in that market
c) Oldsmobile's lack of quality
d) Oldsmobile's uninspiring design and bland interiors
e) Oldsmobile's poor resale value

It sold better when they swapped in a DOHC engine. I'm not saying that it would have OUTSOLD the Camry, but people look for certain labels. Like "Intel Inside", "Microsoft", and "Compaq" do to computers. It doesn't matter if they're good or not, the labels often make or break an item.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

but consider the Oldsmobile Intrigue didn't sell as well as it should have because it had the 3800 instead of a DOHC V6. Nothing was wrong with the engine, and it went head to head with the Camry and came out ahead (I have a Car and Driver comparison test at home I can bring up). But people were looking for labels, whether they were important or not.

You think the reason the Camry outsold the Intrigue was because of the way they named the engine? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

I think it probably had more to do with
a) Toyota/import reliability
b) Oldsmobile's lack of brand identity in that market
c) Oldsmobile's lack of quality
d) Oldsmobile's uninspiring design and bland interiors
e) Oldsmobile's poor resale value

It sold better when they swapped in a DOHC engine. I'm not saying that it would have OUTSOLD the Camry, but people look for certain labels. Like "Intel Inside", "Microsoft", and "Compaq" do to computers. It doesn't matter if they're good or not, the labels often make or break an item.

I'm not convinced. I know I wouldn't buy a vehicle simply because it had VTEC stamped on the valve cover or DOHC in description of the engine. Now if it said Oldsmobile on the car I would definitely NOT buy it. :beer:

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

but consider the Oldsmobile Intrigue didn't sell as well as it should have because it had the 3800 instead of a DOHC V6. Nothing was wrong with the engine, and it went head to head with the Camry and came out ahead (I have a Car and Driver comparison test at home I can bring up). But people were looking for labels, whether they were important or not.

You think the reason the Camry outsold the Intrigue was because of the way they named the engine? BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

I think it probably had more to do with
a) Toyota/import reliability
b) Oldsmobile's lack of brand identity in that market
c) Oldsmobile's lack of quality
d) Oldsmobile's uninspiring design and bland interiors
e) Oldsmobile's poor resale value

It sold better when they swapped in a DOHC engine. I'm not saying that it would have OUTSOLD the Camry, but people look for certain labels. Like "Intel Inside", "Microsoft", and "Compaq" do to computers. It doesn't matter if they're good or not, the labels often make or break an item.

I'm not convinced. I know I wouldn't buy a vehicle simply because it had VTEC stamped on the valve cover or DOHC in description of the engine. Now if it said Oldsmobile on the car I would definitely NOT buy it. :beer:

It happens. Though you do point out that people that would never touch a Pontiac Vibe buy a Toyota Matrix, and people that wouldn't dare be seen in a Chevy Prism show off thier Toyota Corolla. Even though the only parts that differ are the body panels and the badges.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

For the record, I'd rather have a Dodge Magnum, I perfer the looks, and I don't mind owning a wagon.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Ornery
It might be a fair price, but it won't fly off the lot at that price. Hell, Ford still doesn't seel many Crown Vics or G. Marquis' at $22,000. Used to be the norm. :brokenheart:

crappy crown vic interior, crappy crown vic acceleration, crappy cushy sofa-on-wheels ride...

the only thing the crown vic has going for it is that it parts traffic like moses parting the red sea

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

I think it probably had more to do with
a) Toyota/import reliability
b) Oldsmobile's lack of brand identity in that market
c) Oldsmobile's lack of quality
d) Oldsmobile's uninspiring design and bland interiors
e) Oldsmobile's poor resale value

I agree with everything except "uninspiring design and bland interiors", Toyota loses that one by a landslide.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

I think it probably had more to do with
a) Toyota/import reliability
b) Oldsmobile's lack of brand identity in that market
c) Oldsmobile's lack of quality
d) Oldsmobile's uninspiring design and bland interiors
e) Oldsmobile's poor resale value

I agree with everything except "uninspiring design and bland interiors", Toyota loses that one by a landslide.

True but the Olds doesn't look any better and at least the interior on the Toyota won't be falling apart in 4 years.

 

[geno]

True but the Olds doesn't look any better and at least the interior on the Toyota won't be falling apart in 4 years.

My GF's dad has a 00' Aurora and the interior is every bit as tight as his Acura RL's was. I'm NO fan of GM but that Aurora downright impresses me, very smooth riding, the 4.0 V8 is a pleasure to drive, more pleasureable and fun to drive than a Camry that's for sure (yes, I realize they're very different cars in two separate market segments, but the quality is very much up to snuff)

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"...yet again slamming something that isn't a full size Ford."

I like it just fine, as I liked the LS400 when it first came out. Trouble is, it's also priced too damn high. We used to build these type cars for the average family commuter, nice and cheap. Ford still only charges $20K for theirs.

The writer is flat out wrong, if he thinks this is a car America has been longing for. If America wanted it so bad, why did America turn it's back on these cars two decades ago. Chrysler was the first of the big three to abandon RWD altogether. Now, all of a sudden, it's the way to go!

perhaps its a thing called computer controlled traction systems that make rwd safe for all to drive?

 

[Ornery]

That makes no sense to me. RWD isn't inherently 'safer' as far as I know. But larger, full framed cars are almost always RWD, and they ARE safer. Given a choice, I'd opt not to have traction control, or anti lock brakes, because I don't want the added expense and complexity. Just a nice, simple, roomy, 350ci, turbohydromatic driven, full framed, 4dr sedan for $20,000, isn't asking for much. A station wagon version, that can carry 4'x8' sheets of plywood with the tailgate closed, would be nice, too!

 

[T2T III]

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Yo

Like that first pic ?

Any rear-wheel drive car can be "power braked" to light up the rear tires like that. Actually, that's no indication of power at all.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: geno

True but the Olds doesn't look any better and at least the interior on the Toyota won't be falling apart in 4 years.

My GF's dad has a 00' Aurora and the interior is every bit as tight as his Acura RL's was. I'm NO fan of GM but that Aurora downright impresses me, very smooth riding, the 4.0 V8 is a pleasure to drive, more pleasureable and fun to drive than a Camry that's for sure (yes, I realize they're very different cars in two separate market segments, but the quality is very much up to snuff)

My Mom-In-Law had an Aurora. She got rid of it with 36k miles because she had a bunch of problems with it. Not the least of which were problems with the interior.

My friend's Dad has one and it needed a new engine at 60k miles. He lucked out and got them to replace it under warranty (he has connections though).

Yes, they are completely different cars. In the price range of an Aurora there are many cars that are much better.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Yo

Like that first pic ?

Any rear-wheel drive car can be "power braked" to light up the rear tires like that. Actually, that's no indication of power at all.

I had an 81 dodge mirida with a /6 and 90hp so I already know that. I just liked the picture.

 

[pr0craztinazn]

if the car stays together well over time, chrysler may have a winner. i, too, like the magnum more than the 300c.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Ornery
That makes no sense to me. RWD isn't inherently 'safer' as far as I know. But larger, full framed cars are almost always RWD, and they ARE safer. Given a choice, I'd opt not to have traction control, or anti lock brakes, because I don't want the added expense and complexity. Just a nice, simple, roomy, 350ci, turbohydromatic driven, full framed, 4dr sedan for $20,000, isn't asking for much. A station wagon version, that can carry 4'x8' sheets of plywood with the tailgate closed, would be nice, too!

nope. in rain/snow, a rear wheel drive uses its front tires like snow plows.. a fwd car has a ton of weight on the front wheels and uses power to create the path. for normal drivers, the fwd was safer until the advent of traction control systems. and when a rwd oversteers, the solution is counter intuitive, u gotta turn the opposite direction to regain control while your rear end swings around towards the front of your car. with understeed and fwd you just keep trying to turn where you want to go while slowing down to regain control, and your rear doesn't swing towards the front, you just dont turn as well. in that split second where the average person has to make that decision while going off the road, they are more likely to make the right one with a fwd. u may laugh at normal drivers, but thats how it is. i'm sure many of us without anti lock brakes know that we are supposed to pump em in a hard stop, but even i've stomp locked on occasion when i just don't react fast enough.

http://www.familycar.com/NextCar/Step3.htm