Chyrsler Quality

Hmmm.

That explains it. Who cares. It's a small bus. After all, it's not like you bought it because you wanted to impress the chicks. It's basic mass-transportation. It's ain't no sports sedan. (yea, I know the flames are coming. You're wasting your time).

What - you think you're driving a sports car?

How are they going to sell the mini-bus to short soccer moms who don't driver faster than 30 mph in the rain?

Seriously, if you think Chrysler made a bad move swapping better tires with movable pedals then you bought the wrong vehicle.

OK... so you must have test drove the van before you bought it - or did you? NO....THEN WHY THE HELL DID YOU BUY IT? And if you did look at a simular van from Toyoto or GM, I am sure it would have been thousands of dollars more. You get what you pay for. as they say. OHHH... and Yea... it is really only a "Mommy Car" :-)

Dan

You get what you pay for. as they say. OHHH... and Yea... it is really

Yes, that was my point. Chrysler is fighting the rebate wars it must fight and financing that, in part, by switching to less expensive leather and tires. But even with its flaws, the vehicle is very nice for the price. But if Chrysler thinks that all it needs to fight Honda and Toy is to put in folding middle and rear seats, I think that may be a mistake. Quality and dependability is what will sell these vehicles without huge rebates, IMO. As it stands the Town and Country Limited with DVD display and sunroof was still 5 to 8 thousands dollars less than the Honda and Toy. It may be a mom's car, but I will smile when I switch the OEM tires for new Mich Hydro tires for an extra $300.00.

Richard.

But, the real warning that your missing is that it seems comparing the current year's interation with a prior year, the current year is lacking.

If the current T&C is made worse and designed worse than, say, a 5 year old T&C, then in my opinion you have a problem. That's a linear progression which is going to end the vehicle model going to the Great Auto Graveyard in the Sky.

Ted

A few weeks ago I was at a Chrysler lot looking at the Pacifica. Started looking at new 300M's to see the changes from my 99. The trim around the windshields of every one I looked at was put in defectively. I can imagine anyone interested in buying one would exit quickly after looking at the obviously poor assembly.

Sounds like we can blame that on Juergen Schrempp's management team. The agitation about the decline in quality -- interior included -- of the Mercedes-Benz Division is enormous.

DAS

--

To clarify, the windshield trim I was talking about was on the outside of the car so the sloppiness was obvious to the casual observer. Basically the black side molding of the windshield were only half installed on the several 300M's I was near.

Art,

If you haven't owned a Chrysler in 20+ years, why do you still read this ng?

Matt

Well I have a 99 300M and a 2001 Avalon. The 300M is a superior car. But it sure looks like they are being sloppy putting the new ones together. Even so, if I was buying a similar sized car now, I would look for a well put together 300M and buy it over the Avalon. The

300M may have some manufacturing defects that the dealer can fix but the Avalon has (in my opinion) major design flaws that cannot be changed.

Plymouth

would

thousands of

comparing

I have a 94 New Yorker and I love it, no problems what so ever except for that regular maintanance, oil, aligment, filters, etc...Has150,000k driving