Fiat Chief Shuffles Chrysler Exec Lineup

Oct 05, 2009 27 Replies

When I told my brother in law I bought a 300M he almost freaked out. He thought it was a 300 which he also hates the look of. When I clarified the difference he said what a difference, a lovely looking car. I had a '95 LH, definitely not equal to the 300M mechanically, although the LH2 cars are closer. But after all they weren't sports sedans, so no comparison. Unfortunately the LH2 Intrepid is too squashed looking in the front, it's a Sebring test styling. The LH2 Concorde is too long and not as good a handling car.

I agree the 300 is a solid vehicle, but it looks it's part with a truck like front end and very shallow windows. Of course it's additional weight of several hundred lbs. drags down the 3.5L engine, which is more than adequate in the 300M. One day a 300C was parked beside my LH Concorde, as I approached from the front I couldn't believe how ugly the 2008 300C looked beside my lovely looking oldie '95 Concorde. Even if the 300 was FWD which I need, I would never buy it. Lets face it, there those who like a macho boxy car design, there are more who want a smooth graceful design. The pimps agree with you, as I'm sure you've noticed.

BTW I've rented the LH2 Intrepid several times for about 6 weeks total and a Magnum for 2 weeks. The Intrepid I could live with, but sorry the Magnum was not even close to my desires.

As for the large gas burning hulking over chromed heavy monster cars of the 50s/70s, I was never interested in them. Just not my thing. the European sport sedan approach to design is what interests me.

I find it interesting that so many popular cars of the last several years have adopted the 300M styling profile. Obviously it's well liked and Chrysler set the trend way back in the late 90s when they were still running their business themselves.

they are planning some design changes for 2010 or 2011 i think for the 300 wonder what it will look like then.......

I was at the local Chrysler dealer a few days back and ended up purchasing a new 2010 PT Cruiser. They were pushing leftover Sebrings, the ones with the raked hood that to me is plain fugly.

Why do so many cars today look like wanna be trucks, rather than cars?

I want my cars to be cars, like my 2000 3ooM with 28,000 miles in the garage, my 95 T-Bird, or the new Challenger.

If I didn't need an inexpensive multi purpose vehicle like the PT Cruiser I would have taken home a hemi Challenger

It looks like some entrepreneur would make an aftermarket hood for the Sebring without the grooves. I figure - yeah - Sebring owners typically aren't into spending money for mod'ing, but you'd think there should be enough owners willing to spend the money to make it worthwhile to someone.

if its advertised enough, it would raise interest. like the Chrysler aspen, people wont buy what they don't know exists..

Not only ugly, but very impractical when you get snow freezing on it. Those hood slots could make washing more difficult, but I wasn't going that far with it. That hood and the inability to hold a full size tire in the spare compartment, ended my consideration of that Sebring as my next car. I believe the dumb hood is changed this year.

It's mainly Chrysler, they must have dumped all their car designers. Looks to me like Ford hired them, Ford's cars are getting better with every model these days.

Most people don't buy a new car that needs expensive body mods to please them. Perhaps if there was some other standout reason, but that doesn't exist with the Sebring.

Like I said: "I figure - yeah - Sebring owners typically aren't into spending money for mod'ing, but you'd think there should be enough owners willing to spend the money to make it worthwhile to someone."

How many would you need to sell to recover the up front costs and start making money? What percentage of Sebrings sold would that represent?

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required