Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39452 posts, RR: 76 Posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5834 times:
This is hard to believe but Chrysler just may go through with this.
The Chrysler 300N
Finally a V8 powered rear-drive from Chrysler for the first time since they discontinued the M-body (Grand Fury / Diplomat & Fifth Avenue) in 1989.
Their last 'full-sized' sedan was the 1982 R- body (St. Regis / Newport / New Yorker & Imperial) in 1982.
All-aluminum 353 cubic inch (5.7-liter) pushrod V-8 engine features hemispherical combustion chambers and two spark plugs per cylinder. Its estimated power of 353 horsepower and 353 lb.-ft. of torque is delivered to the rear wheels via a robust four-speed automatic transmission.
174thfwff From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3536 times:
It looks good, but my current and past experiences with American car companies have been aweful with me and my family.
My 2 past foregin cars (2000 Toyota Camry V6 and 2001 VW Passat, Toyota owned for 6 months, Passat 4 months) and I ahve driven them very hard. Already in my passat I have clocked 14k miles in 4 months. What went wrong with it? Nothing. I change oil and get tires rotated. In the Toyota I drove 6 months and clocked 25k miles on it and did the same thing. However our 2001 GMC SUV has 50k miles on the clock, has been babied except for some light off roading, is falling appart. Our other 2001 GMC SUV was complete crap and fell appart every 5k miles. Before that our 1996 GMC Jimmy was very unreliable. (I know this isn't about engines, but the Vortec engine isn't powerful enough to tow around the Jimmy at 192 hp. It feels very winded at highway speeds, but thats for another post).
My dad has to buy American because he landed a big deal with the local unions (steemfitters and one other one). He's looking at the Jeep, which Chrysler owns...I sure hope it doesn't crap out.
About that car, the 4 door looks mighty sharp, looks being the key term.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3509 times:
All of the current LH cars will be replaced by a new rear-drive or all-wheel drive LX platform. Which will include a hot-rodded Hemi-head V8 with a lot of Mercedes underpinnings. Basically the trannys and telematics will all be sourced from Munich. From what I hear the new cars will be using the Mercedes 5-speed autoshifter, not the current Chrysler 4-speed... which isn't much of a loss.
Chrysler really was doing well on the styling side of the equation since the mid 90s with the original Neon, LH cars and cloud cars (Cirrus, Stratus and Breeze) but lacked on the engineering side. Some stuff was just plain bad, like poor head sealing on the 2.0 four, to ok. Though the current generation of Chrysler engines appear to be much better.
I think the Big-3 are all realizing that they really lost something when they dropped their rear-drive platforms. There is a lot of flexibility to do stuff when the engine points north-to-south. There were supposed to be AWD and RWD vehicles on the original LH platform.
The next five years should be interesting for DCX as they rationalize their line-up and combine platforms. Basically 4 cylinders will be handled by Mitsubishi Motors, 6 cylinders by Chrysler... and small and mid-sized cars will share a common platform developed by Mitsubishi.
Hopefully the new LX platform cars will get the public excited again.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
Finally Chrysler cars that are interesting! (the last interesting Chrysler cars were my 1987 New Yorker --props to you Superfly!)
However, I wouldn't comment about styling, Desertjets, since the 90's were that absolute nadir. The ugly blobs like the Neon, Cirus, Breeze etc. were all boring and had no character. (Ford is the only one to do the "blob" thing with class)
I am glad that Chrysler is getting back to actually "engineering" cars as their past was legendary-the durable and tough 3.7 Slant6, the 426 Hemi, various other cars like the Turbine, Firedome etc.
I am also glad to see a return to RWD, hence BMW, Mercedes, Lexus etc all saw fit to maximize the potential of it as opposed to dropping it.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3478 times:
747-451... gonna have to diagree with you. Especially with the 1987 Chrylser New Yorker... probably a low point in design there. Did your's talk? Of that era I think that the Lancer/ LeBaron GTS was the better car.
I will stand by my belief, and a belief held by most in the automotive press, that the mid-90s designs were (maybe groundbreaking is a little too strong) but far better than what most were selling. If you want to talk about lifeless blobs look at a mid-90s Ford Contour... or any mid-90s Ford. The Neon was undeniably cute, and a far better car than the Shadow/Sundance ever was. The LH cars, in my opinion, were probably the best looking big cars of their time. They really proved what could be done with "cab forward" architecture. They still look fresh now almost 10 years later. The cloud cars were certainly more than blobs... and profoundly better looking than the Acclaim and Spirit. My friends called my 1990 Acclaim, my old-lady car.
But, I may be wrong here... but doesn't that sketch of the 300N look a lot like the original ESX concept car???
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3468 times:
My 1987 New Yorker, looks like a "luxury car" and it even though it's roots may show, it still distinguished itself as far as Chrysler and other makes; it looks like an American Boulevard Cruiser with it's wire wheels, "Landau top" and "waterfall grille". It talks, and it runs very well (at 90,000miles). The Infinity Audio is fantastic. It also helps the Turbo is lightning fast (I've knoced off my share of BMWs etc) and it does have uprated suspension ( shorn with Dunlop tires). The "french provincial" interior is just the oposite of the Teutonic taxicabs that pass for luxury today. I liked the LebaronGTS and Lancer but "hacthbacks" (those are for dogs, children, wives etc) on sport or luxury cars are out of place (unless it is a Frebird or Camaro). Actually they were amongst the better mid sizes of the era and were very well thoguht out sport sedans.
Quite frankly, I prefred the Accalim/Spirit because of their simple styling, roomy trunks, interirors with big doorways and high rooflines. I'll take practicality over stylish fecklessness any day! (However, the later NY'ers and LHS's are very beautiful with their traditional rooflines and grilles)
I really don't care for the "cab forward" look, since all it made for was a huge windsheld and dashboard and very narrow front foot wells (I'm 6'1" and there is more front room in my 87 NYer that my girlfriend's 94 Vision). Actually, you can't beat the room of a Crown Vic. (PS as far as blobs, I own a 1994 Tempo as well and I think it is a blob, however it is certainly roomier and more practical than the horrible Neon and even the Breeze etc. )
As far as reliability, nothing could beat a 2.2 Trans4, the 3 speed auto and the simple K chassis (and it's incarnations). Even though horribly dated by today's standards, they were certainly more reliable than such things as the wretched "ultradrive" and some of the later 4 cyl powerplants.
I honestly think that Chrysler lost it's vitality when Lee reiterd and I don't really care for the "Daimler" connection either. (It should have been Chrysler/Daimler). The Prowler, Viper and other specialty cars are nice but do not sustain a company. The PT Cruiser is the only thing they have gotten right in quite a while and the 300M is quite aluring for a gussied up Intrepid ES. However, nothing Chrysler makes right now would make me want to replace my NYer with another Chrysler, including this 300N, since I doubt there will be a 4 door and the price will be prohibitive (for the convertible) I presume let alone if Chrylser builds it. The car Chrysler should have built was the updated Charger R/t sedan from 3 years ago. That was awinner and they decided not to do it either.
The last HUGE RWD Barges Chrysler made were the St. Regis, Gran Fury,
Newport, New Yorker R Bodies which were infact discontinued in 1981, not 1982 . The Imperial which was recreated in 1981 sat on the Mirada chassis and held on til 1983 (in Frank Sinatra Edition only). As you said, the last RWDs were the Fifth Avenue/Diplomat/Gran Fury which hang on til 1989 (with the silky smooth 318).
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39452 posts, RR: 76 Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3462 times:
I have to agree with 747-451.
I think the 'design' of Chryslers in the 1980 and early 1990s was a great time.
Pay close attention to the details in styling and ornamentation.
Back then you had elegant 'button-down pillow' leather seats, hood ornaments, cursive written emblem/decals, individual map reading lights styled like the overhead lamps on a Boeing 747-451 aircraft. Wood grain dashboards as well as wood grain and chrome on the door panels for front and rear passengers.
I think the cab forward 'spaceship' look is very cheap. It looks OK on the Neon because that's a cheap car. The Intrepid and Concords are the disappointments in term of style.
I find the 1991-1994 LaBaron sedan, New Yorker Landau and Imperials to be much more luxurious, comfortable and better looking than the plastic spaceships that's replaced them.
That steering wheel is NOT original. I hate it when people do this.
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3447 times:
And to add to Superfly's comments, Chrysler cars of the 80's and early 90's were the most technologically advanced domestically, aside from the ornamentation and styling. Chrysler was the first to produce front drive in the US, use Turbochargers, intercooling, beat GM as far as sport sedans (the Shelby lancer will peel the skin off a 6000STE), were the first to use digital displays, computers and voices on the largest array of models (as opposed to just keeping them on exlusive lines like Cadillac or Linclon which had them before Chrysler). Chrysler's second golden age was in the early eighties to the early 90's and they did a grat job of amalgamating technology, practicality, innovation and luxury.....
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3422 times:
Superfly... is that real corinthian leather in there???
I guess different strokes for different folks.
My dad had a 1987 Turbo New Yorker as a demo for a few months when he worked at a Chrysler-Plymouth-Volvo dealer. The car was used. But it was beige, with landau top, wire wheels, digital dash, and button-tufted seats. I am glad that is no longer the standard of what luxury is. I don't need to have a living room sofa in my car.
The Acclaim was an ok car. It actually sold a lot better, along with the Spirit and LeBaron sedan, than the cloud cars. And in the uplevel trims, LE,LX, ES they were actually quite nice. Mine was a 1990 LE with the Mitsu V6, bench seat, column shifter. And that six made the car somewhat fun to drive. When it was younger it could lay rubber and surprise kids driving Civics.
If you want the pinnacle of front-drive Chrysler luxo-barges try and find a 1990-1992 Chrysler Imperial... it was pretty well received by the press... but for nearly $30,000 in 1990 it was probably overpriced and needed a V8 to compete with the Sedan DeVille.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39452 posts, RR: 76 Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
I don't need to have a living room sofa in my car.
Ahh, I love that living room sofa feel in a car.
Seriously I do!
When I am sitting in traffic, I want something that reminds me of home.
I have funny story about those 1990-1992 Imperials.
I was riding in my friends car when one passed us up and he said "Wow, that's a nice looking Chrysler".
I told him that it was a stretched out Plymouth Reliant fully loaded with a bigger engine. He just laughed and couldn't believe that Chrysler is still in business. Me and him are bif Ford fans
To answer your question, YES I do have Corinthian leather!
Ant I also have the Brazilian Rosewood aplique instrument panel.
However, I don't have the Chronometer that was certified by the Swiss government.
instead I have the digital clock on the trip computer and stereo.
NWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3396 times:
Before that our 1996 GMC Jimmy was very unreliable. (I know this isn't about engines, but the Vortec engine isn't powerful enough to tow around the Jimmy at 192 hp. It feels very winded at highway speeds, but thats for another post).
You must be treating your cars like shit or something. I've had 2 Blazers in my life, a '93 and '97, and they were both very reliable. Never a big problem under 130,000 miles. Yet, on the other hand, the Toyota we bought my mom a few years ago started having major problems under 25K, so I stick with better, American cars.
Also, the 4.3L V6 has more than enough power in the Blazer. I have trouble not going over 90MPH on the highways, it wants to go. Hell my parent's Astro could out-run many small cars.
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3373 times:
IF YOU READ MY POST, YOU GUYS, you would have seen that Chrysler was the first DOMESTIC car maker to offer front wheel drive, before Ford and GM. I know other manufactiurers sold FWD cars in the US before Chrysler.
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6 Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3366 times:
"My dad had a 1987 Turbo New Yorker as a demo for a few months when he worked at a Chrysler-Plymouth-Volvo dealer. The car was used. But it was beige, with landau top, wire wheels, digital dash, and button-tufted seats. I am glad that is no longer the standard of what luxury is. I don't need to have a living room sofa in my car."
After driving to Florida in a 2000 BMW 540, I am very glad to have my "living room on wheels". I could live without the overly stiff and flat seats, the tire noise and the way too firm ride (even for a sport sedan). Today's luxury cars have all the excitement of a NY taxi cab. I also would rather be mistaken for a "pimp" than a "Tempo" any day. My Chrysler may not handle like a "Corvette", but then again, I don't drive it like on either (the Turbo and "uprated suspension" make it very capable however). The "Kimberly Velour" interior (an extra cost option instead of the corinthian hide) and test tube wood add a bit of character to a fairly well thoguh thought interior
I made a mistake as far as not clarifying the FWD thing, but my "screaming" in my last posts should clear things up (between you and I, Chrysler makes the best domestic FWD cars, after all, GM's answer to the Omnirzon were the wretched X cars and Ford's dull Escort.)
I make a career of of boasting about the E series FWD Chryslers and here is a page I wrote that was posted on Allpar:
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39452 posts, RR: 76 Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3353 times:
That was your article?!?!?!?!
I read that article almost a year ago!
You really know your stuff when it comes to cars.
The compact luxury car market was very short lived.
As a Ford/Mercury/Lincoln enthusiest, I will say that Chrysler made better FWD compacts and mini-luxury cars.
I really like those 1990-1992 LeBaron Landau sedans.
The 1985 LTD LX was a small powerful car with a 302 V8 Cobra engine but it was more of a performance car and not a luxury car.
The Pontiac Bonneville (1990-1996?) were a good second but again, performance was more the focus of this car than luxury. The 1989-91 Cadillac Sevilles were great small luxury cars but I just wished Cadillac stayed out of this market and left it to Buick and Oldsmobile.
Lincoln should have never made a Tempo based Continental nor should they have made a Taurus based one either.
That leaves the Chrysler Landau versions of the NewYorker and LeBaron as the greatest mini-luxury boxes.
Bring back the Concorde
25 Sccutler: 1. The Cords were American automobiles, and Cord was manufactuing Front Wheel Drive cars at least by 1929, perhaps earlier (too tired to dig right now
26 Racko: 747-451, Daimler controls Daimler-Chrysler (See the nationality of the Chrysler-boss...), you can be happy that the company after all is called Daimle
27 DesertJets: 'Fly and 747-451... I guess you're the reason why they still make the Town Car and the LeSabre. Those are probably the best living room sets on wheels
28 Boeingnut: Desertjets: Basically the trannys and telematics will all be sourced from Munich I think you mean Stuttgart, unless Chrysler has some dealings with BM
29 DesertJets: Munich, Stuttgart.... at least they are both in southern Germany, so I wasn't TOO far off.
30 Superfly: My LeBaron talks. I think that's kind of cool. I just hate when it cuts in to a song I am listening to just to tell me "Please check your fuel level".
31 Milemaster: That article is quite dated.. this car is already scheduled to be produced as a 2004 model "Crossfire".. You can see it on: www.chrysler.com This look
32 747-451: Aw, Scutter... Yes the Cord, Eldorado, Toronado were the first FWD's, however the distinction they hold is that they were specialty or luxury cars....
33 Ilyushin96M: ROFLMAO!!! OK...Chryslers of the '80s, NICE CARS??? I cleaned way too many of those to agree. I've never seen a bunch of vehicles with worse horrid bu
34 DesertJets: The LeBaron and Dodge 400 were the first American made convertibles after the Eldo ragtop was dropped in 76. And all of the early convertibles, where
35 747-451: Supa; I wrote that aritcle a long time ago, and after 178000miles on a 600 and happy miles continuing with the NYer, I felt that these "fine" products
36 747-451: I wonder about the Imperial you write about since in WI they put salt on everything, by the TON. When I used to travel ti Madison on business, I saw e
37 Superfly: Hey I like that Las Vegas Whorehouse look!
38 747-451: Now those are interirors!!!! (BTW, who's the blonde, She's hot...that's my idea of seat covers!!!! ) (PS those have to be shots from a 1975 Imperial o
39 Superfly: 747-451: I got it from that Imperial fan club website. http://www.imperialclub.com/YearbyYear/1977/SpottersGuide/ Iteresting, an Imperial 'spotters' w
40 Superfly: BTW, did you get an image on the very last one? Sometimes it comes up as a box with red X. Right click on the box, cut & paste URL in taskbar and hit
41 174thfwff: The crossfire's radio and stuff has some MB resemblance. -174thfwff
42 DesertJets: That Imperial is pretty bad. And by bad I mean good, and by good I mean bad. Too bad you don't see more red leather these days. Now looking at the gri
43 Fanoftristars: DesertJets wrote: "I think the Big-3 are all realizing that they really lost something when they dropped their rear-drive platforms. There is a lot of
44 Fanoftristars: Oops, sorry desert jets, I guess that's what you were trying to say. I'm retarded
45 JETPILOT: If I may sum up the Crossfire in one word..... UGLY and thats understating the fact. JET
46 Superfly: That Crossfire reminds me of the Plymouth Barracuda.
47 DesertJets: I don't see where you see the Cuda in the Crossfire Superfly. Here are some pics of the Mirada and a nicely refurbished 600 Convertible. Bear in mind
48 Superfly: I was getting my 1960s era Mopar products mixed up. I was thinking of the 1966 Dodge Charger rear-end.
49 Ilyushin96M: 747-451, that was in Coronado, CA, where I spent my formative years. I started washing/detailing cars when I was 11, and still get requests from forme
50 Heavymetal: Child of the 80s here. The "K" car ruined me on Chrysler for life. Although I rode as a passenger in a PT Cruiser for the first time yesterday and I c
51 Superfly: Heavymetal: The PT Cruiser is based off the Neon and has the same engine and transmission as the Neon. I think the looks of Chrysler has always been g
52 Stretch 8: In November 1985, I was in my second year of law school, and needed a new car. I purchased a blck 1986 Dodge GLH Turbo. The car was a real blast; a "p
53 Superfly: Stretch8: I'll take a case of Marin Brewing Company - San Quentin Breakout Stout. That is some good stuff! Here are your Dodge GLH Turbo ads.
54 Superfly: Stretch 8: Hey man, whare is my beer?
55 Superfly: 747-451: Hey if you're still reading this, send me an email. I have some important Chrysler questions.
56 747-451: Superfly, Check your email plz.... 747-451
57 Superfly: 747-451: Thanks man. Very very informative!
58 Greg: Actually, the Crossfire is interesting...much in the same way you can't stop looking at a car crash. It's best feature is that most the important comp
59 Fanoftristars: Superfly: As the proud owner of a 2002 PT Cruiser, I must beg to differ on the Neoness of this car/truck/what-ever-it-is. The engine and transmission
60 Superfly: Greg: Actually, the Crossfire is interesting...much in the same way you can't stop looking at a car crash. That was hillarious! Fanoftristars: Thanks
61 Apathoid: Like the car, but I gotta throw the bullshit flag on 174 here. In his first post in this thread, he says he put 25,000 miles on one car in 6 months wh
62 Superfly: Those are the smartest words I've ever read from Apathoid. What kind of VW did you have and what kind of Chrysler do you have now?
63 N312RC: A few days ago after school I was walking out to my car and saw this: The Pacifica. Apparently it was an engineer at Chrysler picking up his son after
64 Apathoid: It was a 99 Jetta. I bought it new because the sales lady was blond and had perky boobs. What an idiot. It was too small...rattled too much....the rad
65 747-451: Great yet another SUV to profane the highways with arrogant drivers
66 Apathoid: Well, that hardly deserves a response especially since the Town and Country is not even remotely an SUV and is in fact more fuel efficient (in my expe
67 Planelover: I'm not sure if this has been mentioned or not (i didn't read all the above posts), but, now that Chrysler is part of Mercedes, some of Chrysler's new
68 Fanoftristars: I can't wait to see the Pacifica in real life. I'm not sure I'll see it until NAIAS in Detroit. Not too many Pacificas 'round these parts Apathoid: In
69 Apathoid: We had the car for about a week and the insturment cluster lighting quit working. Brand new car, mind you. It wasn't a fuse, so I took it to the deale
70 Superfly: Will any of the small cars go the rear-wheel drive?
71 Usair767: Let me save you all trouble untill you see the titles Diamler-Crysler they dont have jack together its still the same old sh*t it was years ago Diamle
72 Mirrodie: FYI, Superfly, my cousin is the Senior Design chief and Engineer of the 300 series.
73 Superfly: Mirrodie: Oh really? Me and your cuz' needs to have a talk.
74 Racko: Superfly, the 2004 BMW 1er series will have rear-wheel-drive.
75 Superfly: Racko: I am well aware that the poor-man's BMW will be rear-wheel drive. It's only redeeming value.