300C's as beautiful as in the ads

I mean like when has the car line-up from Dodge/Chrysler ever been as limited as it is now?

Plymouth:

- gonzo

Dodge:

- Neon

- SRT-4

- Stratus (2 versions)

Chrysler:

- Sebring (3 versions)

- 300 (4 visually-identical versions)

Like I said, I'm not a fan of the Daimler takeover, but I just don't see the 4 visually identical versions of the 300 as anything new. There are plenty of legit criticisms of Daimler decisions (like axing Plymouth, making the Pacifica front/AWD v6 only instead of rear/AWD with a v8 option, and gutting the former Chrysler corporation of all its cash it came into the "merger" with).

Do you own a Pacifica? Have you driven one over an extended period of time? We bought ours last August 29 (we went to buy a Grand Cherokee and drove home in the Pacifica AWD). I was not that keen on it but we were buying it for my wife for her daily driver (I really didn't care for the styling and really didn't see why the vehicle was necessary). We are now approaching 13,000 miles and I can honestly say this is the best vehicle we have ever purchased. Quiet, smooth, good pick-up for the So. Calif. freeways (only once have I felt it to be underpowered, and that wasn't on the freeway) and the styling has grown on me to the point that I do like it. We do wish it gave better gas mileage and rearward vision could be better.

I doubt that the Pacifica will go out of production when the Magnum hits the streets (which, by the way, is one of two choices in my mind to replace our '96 T&C LXi next year - the other choice being the new 2005 Grand Cherokee) as the two vehicles are not comparable. The Pacifica may become more appealing now that it will be available in three different trim levels, but time will only tell.

Nope, and Nope.

We

I'm not criticizing your choice, I'm criticising the vehicle for being nearly 2000 pounds heavier than its size would seem to warrant, and for not offering a bigger engine selection. Cadillac offers the 330 HP Northstar in their equivalent vehicle, AND its rear or all-wheel drive, not FWD/AWD. Theirs is so monkey-butt-ugly that I wouldn't consider it, however :-p So that's two strikeouts for American carmakers and the noveau station-wagon, as much as I basically like that class of car. If the Pacifica were available with a drivetrain in the same class as the Cadillac, I'd be ALL OVER it.

I was not that keen on it but we were buying it for my wife

Time will tell- I doubt that the 3.5 will live the 211,000 miles that my '93 3.5 has lived (and still runs like new) lugging all that weight around. I hope it does, but I have doubts that are sufficient to prevent me from considering a Pacifica. I would consider a Magnum for the same tasks, though. Both are just station wagons in a slightly different shape.

I have heard rumors of the V-8 being available this year for the Pacifica but they ARE only rumors. Time will tell on that but I would think that DC will seriously have to consider doing that, especially when the Magnum AWD becomes available, to keep the Pacifca a viable alternative from Chrysler. Time will tell.

One seats six in three rows with the center row seats being adjustable and one seats five in two rows. One has straight-across entry and the other has step-down. It all depends upon what one wants. As I stated, the Magnum is in serious consideration to replace our '96 T&C next year.

I know you weren't criticizing our choice, just the vehicle. I was merely trying to point out that the vehicle does handle well for it's heavier-than-necessary size.

No, it's not new. That's not the point.

A few years ago (and certainly 3+ decades ago) we had more car-lines that each had their externally-identical sub-models. Over the past few years there are fewer and fewer basic car models from Chrysler. The 300 now replaces the LHS, Concord, Intrepid, etc.

Just wait. If Chrysler is still a division of Daimler in 10 years then the only vehicles that Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep will be making will be minivans, trucks and SUV's. You want a car? Go to Merc. (That's assuming that Dodge will still be around in 10 years).

I predicted a few years ago that Dodge seemed to be on track to eliminate passenger cars from their line-up. If it wasn't for the Dodge dealers screaming for a replacement for the Intrepid we wouldn't be hearing talk about the Charger coming back. We'll see if it does.

What makes no sense is that the lower-end of the new 300 line wasn't badged as a Dodge. Someone want to explain that one? Or is Dodge not worthy of getting any new cars - only wagons like the Magnum?

Granted. And it looks best-in-class by FAR. The Murano and its Infiniti equivalent are cartoonish, and the Cadillac is just plain hideous, and the Lexus offering is almost as cartoonish as the Murano. The only thing the Pacifica somewhat missed on was the drivetrain, and Chrysler just did NOT used to mess up THAT aspect of cars in the old days!

And it isn't nearly as ugly as the new Magnum. That is one butt ugly "car."

Matt

Sorry to go back to this post, Steve, but I kept thinking about what you said regarding the weight of the Pacifica so I did a bit of research. Our Pacifica AWD weighs 4675 lbs. and our '96 T&C LXi weighs 4163 lbs. making the Pacifica

RP

..............and I also have to respond to this one again, Steve. By what you are posting above, that the Pacifica is nearly 2000 pounds heavier that its size would seem to warrant, you feel the Pacifica should only weigh 2675 pounds??????

RP

Of course, I would counter that the "mini" vans are no longer "mini" and are bloated themselves. :-)

Then, of course, I would have to counter, using this statement, that the only vehicle you feel would qualify as a "mini" van is the ungodly Scion box????? ;-)

RP

That thing doesn't even qualify as a vehicle I want to share the roadways with, let alone own :-p

I really don't understand why there are not any true minivans or mini trucks on the market anymore. They always seemed like perfect niche vehicles to me. But mini trucks are now as big as the Dakota was when it started out as a midsize, and minivans are as heavy as the old B-series vans used to be.

You are in the minority in your beliefs. I am sorry.

Can you site any studies that support your "minority" statement?

The 300C does not have a classic (or refined) look.

It has a novelty look. The same way the PT cruser has a novelty look.

The exterior styling of the 300C was designed to have in-your-face impact. If Chrysler can't give a sedan a classy, refined, respectible look (because that's reserved for Mercedes cars) then we'll give it a bold, heavy-handed novelty look. Worked for the PT.

Is it working for the C? Not around where I live (SW Ontario). Around here, you can't swing a Pacifica without hitting a 300M. The new 300's are few and far between. However, drive east on the 401 between Toronto and Windsor and every 10 minutes you'll pass a car trailer going west loaded with new 300's and Magnums. I don't know where they're going...

| > You are in the minority in your beliefs. | | Can you site any studies that support your "minority" statement? | | The 300C does not have a classic (or refined) look. | | It has a novelty look. The same way the PT cruser has a novelty look. | | The exterior styling of the 300C was designed to have in-your-face | impact. If Chrysler can't give a sedan a classy, refined, respectible | look (because that's reserved for Mercedes cars) then we'll give it a | bold, heavy-handed novelty look. Worked for the PT. | | Is it working for the C? Not around where I live (SW Ontario). | Around here, you can't swing a Pacifica without hitting a 300M. The | new 300's are few and far between. However, drive east on the 401 | between Toronto and Windsor and every 10 minutes you'll pass a car | trailer going west loaded with new 300's and Magnums. I don't know | where they're going...

The 300C seems to be selling very well here in the DC area.

interesting... I would have thought you wouldn't dare own a bicycle of any kind.

Speaking of old kitchen items....

I've got a 1956 stove I will likely restore. Although I would prefer to resto-mod it somewhat since I dislike having pilot lights. If that would spoil it, then I'll just live with turning the gas off and lighting it each time.

Also have a toaster of roughly the same vintage. Haven't seen if it works yet. It may. Needs a cleaning a the very least.

Now the ~1939 blender seems to work just fine. The rubber of cap has seen better days however.

I doubt that I will make myself much more popular with this posting but last time I looked the question whether a car looks good or doesn't was a question of personal taste. There is no such thing as 'wrong' or 'right' styling. Styling can help sell cars and it can make people not want to buy them.

I personally like the Chrysler in question for the same reason you drive 'nconformist' cars and have an orange bedroom. It may look odd if the eye is used to soaplike Hondas and Toyotas, but if no manufacturer was willing to break out of the soap cycle and design cars that look unique the world would be a darn boring place.

Chris

Aztek.