300C AWD Hemi

Now heres what would be cool for the M and LHS or any LH car w/ 3.5. Removed the cat?s and move them underneath and use the space that the cats were to build headers and mount 2 turbos there. I would imagine with 8lbs of boost it would make around 350+ HP. Good luck getting a tranny to hold up to the abuse or even control the steering under hard acceleration but that would be awesome....

I wonder if you know the history of the Smart?

It wasn't invented by DC (Daimler-Benz, that is). DC was the car building partner of the company that produced the Swatch. The idea was that it should be the car equivalent of a Swatch watch. Cool, funky, fashionable, affordable etc etc. The partnership fell apart for reasons I don't recall and DC decided to run with it.

It is a highly innovative car and does allow one to change some panels oneself, like changing a watch strap, so to speak. It was not intended to be the primary family car.

However, commercially it is not a success; it is a loss-making division.

I suppose that is mainly for the reason you have implied - other cars offer a bit more space for similar or less money.

Oddly, one of my neighbours here in central London has a Range Rover and a Smart (Brabus version, costing double a base model).

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

How does it maintain constant speed, then?

It doesn't?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

There's no compariosn styling-wise between a Ford 500 and a Chrysler 300. Had the 500 or Mercury Montego been available 17 months ago when I got my

The 500 doesn't have a Nav system so I didn't consider it. I did test drive a Lincoln LS, it's handling and performance wasn't in the same league as the 300C. When I was shopping I looked at the Acura TL and RL, the Lincoln LS, the Lexus LS, the Cadillac CTS, the Toyota Avalon and the Infiniti M45. The 300C ran ring around all of them. The Acura TL had the best Nav system and it's reasonably priced but it's performance, while snappy compared to most cars, doesn't measure up to the 300C. The Infiniti was also an appealing car but it costs $20,000 more then a 300C AWD. I ended up buying a 300C AWD. So far I've been reasonably happy with it. My only complaint is the visibility which is awful, I have to lean forward to see stop lights. However on the highway it's exhilarating, you put your foot down a bit and it feels like it has afterburners.

The styling is nice on the 500 but that plastic crap interior Ford has now leaves a lot to be desired. In fact, it's the only new vehicle (Expedition) that had a terrible new car smell.

And about that Duratec 3.0? No way. I test drove a Ford Escape with one and that engine is weak and quite a chatty engine at that.

No more Fords for me unless they can that cheap interior.

I liked the Acuras but too small :-(

Still can't make up my mind of parting with the M just yet although the thought of having 345 HP makes me seriously consider one. On second thought, I have received a ticket in 10 years :-)

Ken

In addition to a monster engine the 300C has monster brakes so you decelerate as fast as you can accelerate. When I want to feel what it can do I slingshot around a semi, you can go from 75 to a 100 and then back to

You know, we always refer to HP but many of us, including me, forget about how good does the vehicle stop. Good point.

I noticed a local dealer has just received two Charger Daytona today. One Yellow and the other Orange. I still haven't seen the 300 SRT. Is it a limited production car?

Ken

The 2005 Impalla I rented didn't maintain constant speeds going down hills on cruise, it increased speed on steep hills and I had to brake.

There's too little engine in the heavy Ford 500.

I experienced that with the Magnum I rented for 2 weeks.

I have no idea why you need such power or how you avoid speeding tickets. I have trouble keeping my LH 3.3L at a reasonable speed of about 10KPH above the legal limit. That's up to 110KPH limits speed, so I go 120KPH. (100KPH ~= 60MPH) Do you have higher speed limits than ours?

As for the LH 3.3L acceleration I can't use it all because of traffic in front of me. Also it's hill climbing performance is very good, it's a real stump puller. I'm talking hills in the Western Canadian mountains, including the secondary roads that climb up to our ski hills.

A body weakness of the Ford 500 is that the rear of the rear door forms the front of the rear well well. At least they cover it with a plastic strip. Several other vehicles have this body design cheapness, including the Chrysler Sebring (door seal exposed to the wheel crap), and some new GM SUVs. I have not seen this low cost body design on a "Japanese" vehicle.

That's it. The Smart is just too expensive as a second car in Canada.

For just a bit more we have a Sebring which can replace our LH first car if needed. If we were cash strapped a Toyota Echo would be our choice; more car for much less than the Smart. For us a second car at least needs room for two people, two sets of golf clubs and pull carts.

There was some advertising here that the Smart reduces pollution. What crap, not with our current diesel fuel. The Smart actually is quite polluting with our current diesel fuel. OK in a few years with better diesel fuel.

The main use of Smarts here seems to be commercially with painted on advertising. It's quite noticeable, being so different.

...that it's made by Ford.

That is pathetic for cruise control. I can't remember what it was like in the last car I rented in NA. No hills probably, around Toronto...

In Europe I very rarely rent auto as it is much more expensive. My own cars are automatic and I don't have this problem, even on my 1993 model. Well, they are always from a specific brand (Chrysler's sister...).

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling