300C's as beautiful as in the ads

I doubt the bloated Pacifica will remain in production once the Magnum
undercuts it completely. And I actually kinda LIKE the Pacifica and find
it far better looking than the Nissan Murano or other competitors, but
SHEESH its a pig! It weighs almost as much as a '65 Imperial, for
heaven's sake.

 

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 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?

 

RPhillips47 wrote:

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
512 lbs. heavier. To me that is not that much more significant given the extra
AWD mechanics. Additionally, the added weight of the Pacifica makes the vehicle
feel safer and more secure in driving, but that is only our opinion. To be fair
I also looked up the weight of a 2004 T&C Limited AWD as a comparison. It
weighs 4604 lbs. which is only 71 lbs. lighter than 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

 

hmmm a guy here who has a 4 wheel drive car that lives in a city that never sees
snow then bitches about the gas consumtion
sorry couldn't resist

 

You ALWAYS want to put words in my mouth and interpret what I say considerably
different than how I say it. You never stop being a clueless jerk, do you?
Wishing it gave better gas mileage is NOT bitching about it. When the window
sticker says 17 city and it gives 14.9 to 15.1 I CAN say I wish it was better.
I suggest you go to your dictionary (if you know what that is) and look up the
meanings for both "wishing" and "bitching". I doubt they will be the same (but
I am sure you will find a way to make them synonymous).

And just because I mention the So. Calif. freeways doesn't SAY I live in the
city but, of course, you ASSume I do. I actually live north of L.A. in Pine
Valley. Guess what???? We GET snow in the wintertime. We also go to Mammoth and
Tahoe in the winter and guess what???? Those areas ALSO get snow in the winter.

Why don't you do us ALL a favor and stick to posting responses to things you
actually know about (if there are any) and stop taking a shot in the dark with
what you post.

I couldn't resist either, but I am NOT sorry.

 

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

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...

 

| "Percy J. Ellington Von Wellinton IIII" wrote:
|
| > > This is not an attractive car to any degree greater than the
| > > ad hype has made people think it is.
| >
| > 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.

 

Percy, you poor, brainwashed, ignorant slut.

You believe my beliefs place me in the minority, and for this you are
"sorry"? What on earth could you *possibly* believe yourself to be
apologizing for? You think I need your pity because my tastes do not
conform to what you perceive as the norm? Pshaw! I own a 1962 Dodge Lancer
( http://www.torque.net/~u225/cars/62Lancer/62Lancer.html ), a 1971 Volvo
164 ( http://danstern.vrx.net/164/ ), a 1989 Dodge Ram (
http://www.torque.net/~u225/cars/89Ram/89Ram.html ) and a 1992 Dodge
Spirit "R/T". I own six bicycles with Sturmey-Archer epicyclic gearhubs. I
just bought a brand-new GE T93 Toaster Oven (
http://www.torque.net/~u225/LJ/0528/T93hum.jpg and
http://www.torque.net/~u225/LJ/0528/T93pop.jpg ). You'll notice my kitchen
walls are bright red -- my bathroom is school bus yellow, my office is
bright blue, my bedroom is burnt orange, and my living room is leaf green.
I do not have cable or satellite, for I do not watch television.

If my beliefs were in the majority, I'd own a Toyota Corolla or a Honda
Civic or a Ford Explorer, an overpriced and non-serviceable Taiwanese
28-speed mountain bike upon which 21 of the speeds are redundant, a
Chinese-made toaster from Wal-Mart that needs constant supervision, and my
kitchen would be painted "desert sand" or "beige blond" or "toasty mauve"
or one of these other "tasteful" noncolors people spew upon their walls, a
$3000 5-foot television set piping 800 channels of crapola directly into
my living room, and I wouldn't be around to see, use, ride, watch or drive
any of it because I would have long since slashed my wrists to escape the
crushing boredom of life.

No, Percy...if anyone deserves pity here, it ain't me. It's the likes of
you.

DS