Why is the 300 so heavy?

Probably a lot of why the 300 is heavier than the LH is that it is rear drive. The more "compact" drive train of front drive cars tends to make them lighter. Also, the 300 platform is loosely derived from the MB E-class which is kind of heavy, partly (or mostly?) to enhance crashworthiness. Still, the 300 is not terribly heavy for its size.

General Schvantzk>

newer

The Hemi gets 17 MPG city and 22 MPG highway.

We're going in the wrong direction folks. We'll leave our kids and grand kids with a mess if we don't stop buying "things" that are unnecessarily wasteful. Huge houses with a dozen rooms we will never use that consume tons of energy, huge cars that will reach 60MPH in under 6 seconds that consume tons of energy. For what? I understand the thrill of horsepower (I used to own a 1967 GTO), but I was a teenager at the time. Surely we've "grown up"! Haven't we?!

No.

I agree. I can't understand this stupid business of saying cars (like the

I don't think 17 city and 23 highway is a lot of energy now! Actually the MDS hemi engine is a huge step in the right direction!

What do you drive right now and what does it get in efficiency? Also, what does it take to produce those lighter flexible fuel vehicles? And how much of their parts are recyclable once spent? Especially the batteries?

How much of the pollution comes from deforestation and factories?

The answer is not so simple! the wisdom from this complexity is what really defines maturity, not the loss of reflex that pushes one to drive a slug mobile!!

It's United States of America - I've earned my money and I have every right to spend it the way I want. BTW, my 300C does not consume tons of energy. It's pretty efficient for a car of it's class.

The car it replaced got 22/29, how is 17/23 a step in the right direction? The 300 doesn't have anymore passenger room than the Concorde, there might even be less. It handles better on dry pavement but chances are it's rear wheel drive is going to be worse on snow, and snow handling is a 1000 times more important than dry pavement handling. Who worries about a skid on a bright summer day? it's driving in a blizzard that's nerve racking. I don't see why with 10 years of technical advances they weren't able to come up with a car that got better gas mileage and better acceleration than the Concorde.

Also one more beef, why the tiny windows? The 300 has no rear visability. How do you park that thing?

Unfortunately Chrysler believes the only way it can sell cars is with attention getting style and they are willing to sacrifice almost everything else to get it. At the other extreme is steady as you go Toyota who is the ugly turtle winning the longterm sales race.

You missed the point. Your concorde did not have V8. Let's give credit when it's earned. A 340 hp 390 ibs of torque V8 getting that kind of mileage is a step in the right direction.

All those little 4 banger Toyotas and Nissans, and Mitsubishis get lower gas mileage when they make power in that range.

As to the styling, to each his own. I think the styling is awesome, so much that I plop Thirtysomething thousands down.. If you really think about it, some people did find the Aztek appealing, heck someone bought the Isuzu cross....?

That's because body style is a hugely important factor in the new car purchase decision for the majority of people.

Bushwah. Sacrifice everything for styling? Hardly. Why put the most powerful engine available in the class into your vehicle (Magnum) if their styling dictates you sacrifice everything else? Why build minivans? Why build pickup trucks?

...and whose customer demographics are steadily trending older and older, which is why they've been forced to come up with that Scion junk.

Yes, Toyota sales are outstanding. But there are a lot of people out there who attach no more significance to their transportation than they do their refrigerator. Toyota markets their stuff to those folks.

You can win the sales game using any number of different strategies. You are certainly correct at pointing out the difference between Chrysler and Toyota's approaches; I think that you're assigning a bit too much importance to "quantity of sale"s vs. the other factors you could use to 'measure' the 'performance' of an automaker. But then again, I don't personally approach this from the perspective of somebody who's only interest in a car company is the appreciation of its shareholder value.

Cars are about passion and art, Art. Cars are an emotional thing that we don't buy for 100% rational reasons. The best of all worlds is that you buy a car because a.) you love it, b.) you can afford it, and c.) it meets most of your transportation needs. Sometimes we have to behave more pragmatically than that; 'tis the reason why people buy minivans and pickup trucks. But given the opportunity (finances, time, etc.) to do so, most folks would probably keep a sports car in the garage for the days when they don't need the familymobile or pickup truck.

If you want to argue that vehicles should be 100% about efficiency in transportation, economy, sound financial decisions, and environmental responsibility, you might want to see about starting a newsgroup called rec.autos.takethebus. I don't think many people would join you there, however.

--Geoff

The 3.5L engine in the 300 gets 1 MPG more than the HEMI and 4 MPG less than the old 3.5L in the 94 Concorde. The new 3.5 is lighter than the old one and it has the advantage of 10 years of improvements in engine design. The difference is that the 300 is significantly heavier than the Concorde and probably less aerodynamic (it certainly looks less aerodynamic). There aren't any benefits that the extra weight brings, the passenger room is the same or less and the trunk is the same or less. The 0-60 time on the Concorde was more than quick enough even with 214HP, with 250 (which is what the current 3.5 has) it would fly. If the 300 were 800lbs lighter than it is the HEMI would deliver as good or better mileage than the Concorde and it would be close to 5 seconds on the 0-60 time (not that that matters).

Perhaps they removed some aluminum parts that were used and gave vibration problems in the LH cars. That would explain some weight gain.

Well a lot of people I know actually like to see out their cars when they drive. They won't consider the 300 or Magnum or Pacifica.

Hmm, a smoother ride and better crash protection aren't benefits?

The 0-60 time on the

The 2004 Concorde is still (somewhat) available with a choice of three engines: 2.7L, 3.5L (232HP) and 3.5L (250HP).

If the 300 were 800lbs lighter

You're a closet anti-performance guy. Whatever.

--Geoff

The 2004 Concorde doesn't have GPS so it's absolutely uninteresting. GPS is the single most important feature on a new car.

A lot of people I know actually like driving a vehicle that has four wheels instead of two. They won't consider a motorcycle.

A lot of people I know actually like driving a vehicle that they can park. They won't consider a Mack truck, a city bus, or a John Deere combine.

A lot of people I know actually like driving a vehicle that can tow a boat. They won't consider a baby stroller, a Segway, or a rickshaw.

--Geoff

Spend $100, get a Garmin. Spend $300 more, get a 1987 Omni. You've still got change from $500 to pay a year's worth of PL/PD insurance. Done.

:-)

--Geoff

I have a Garmin GPSV ($400 not $100, the $100 GPSs are can't do routing). It's a lot better than no GPS but it's not the same as a built in GPS. It has a tiny amount memory (19M) which limits it to holding one countie's worth of maps. It also takes 5 minute to calculate a route. I've been using it, or it's predecessor the GPSIII+, for several years. I couldn't imagine not having a GPS but now I want a proper one that has a decent amount of memory (the builtin GPSs use a DVD) and a fast processor. If you've never used a GPS you can't imagine how useful they are, you can get anywhere. I live in MA where there are no street signs (State slogan, if you don't know where you are you don't belong here). Having a GPS fixes the lack of signs problem.

Being able to accelerate for 0-60 is absolutely worthless, all that can do for you is to get yuu arrested. Being able to get someplace by the quickest route, or being able to find someplace that you've never been before without having to constantly pull over and look at maps is worth a lot.