PT Cruiser - Put One on My List

I just returned from a business trip that has made a lover of the PT
Cruiser.

After flying into Montreal, I needed to rent a car so I could drive to
remote upstate New York for a business meeting the next day. The Hertz
folks had several different vehicles to choose from but not my old standby
of the Chevy Impala (I love the power) so I decided to try something
different and drove out with a PT Cruiser. I was reluctant at first as I
never much cared for the boxy styling but once inside I was quickly in tune
with the contemporary, Starbucks-Coffee house styling and open roomy feel.
The power and very sensitive turning wheel also surprised a skeptic like me
who always thought the retro styling probably extended to performance as
well.

The real test however, was to come that night half-way between Montreal and
Lake Placid when I hit a snow storm that could make a grown man cry. The
car tunneled through the remote unplowed roads of southern Canada like it
was on a mission and I never had the slightest feeling that I was not in
control as I drove around some pretty sharp bends and steep inclines once I
hit the New York Mountain area.

I've been driving a Camry for the last 7 years but I'm going out to some
dealers this weekend to start eyeballing the Cruiser. The model I rented
was a 2005 and I read a few negative reviews on Yahoo about the 2006 models
(saying they were smaller inside, etc). What are your opinions of the 2006
Cruiser compared to the 2005?

 

have a 2001 PT 5 speed........a few minor complaints/observations......
overall visibility out the back window is limited due to the height of the
window.
Turning radius is very, very poor and where my other vehicles, a Subaru (92)
and a Toyota (83) (both older and now gone 132K on the sub and 188K on the
toy) easily made U TURNS in a space that takes the PT a careful 3 points to
do.
PT seems to fit any reasonable height person.....I am about 5 feet and my
buddy who also has a 2001 is 6'2". We both are comfortable.

Unless you go all out to spend as much as possible on one, they seem to be a
good value for the money in the $20,000 range.

I may look for a newer one in late 2006..........

howard

 

The models with 15" wheels have about a 36.5' turning radius -- with 16" or
17" wheels the turning radius gets larger -- as high as 40'. As long as
you're aware of it from the start then it's fine.

I recently test-drove a new PT Cruiser Limited and found it very enjoyable
overall. It's probably ideal as a commuter vehicle since it had 16" wheels
and was well loaded with features such as the very nice turbo engine
(producing 180hp and 215 lb-ft of torque) and sunroof, and was stickered
under $23k. A bonus is that I believe the 180-hp turbo engine just calls
for 87-oct fuel.

The GT Cruiser has 17" wheels and a sportier suspension and a high-output
turbo with 230hp and 245 lb-ft of torque. As a daily commuter the firmer
ride might get tiring. Premium fuel is called for with the HO turbo engine.
That would run your cost up a bit, but if you're paying for the HO engine
then I'd just enjoy the power and NOT cut back on octane with that engine.
If you put lower octane fuel in it and put up with less power, then why buy
the HO engine in the first place?

I'm really spoiled with the nearly nonexistent engine and road noise from
the '05 Durango, but it would be very interesting to buy a PT and then treat
it liberally with some Dynamat or other sound/vibration deadening product in
the right places. Could probably make it very quiet.

 

It's a real shame the automatic is still just a four-speed, though

 

Right, because you "need" more gear ratios for purposes other than
stroking the marketeers' egos. Not!

 

AWSOME CAR!!!!
MY 01 TOURING HAS 101,500 MILES YES THAT IS 100,00 PLUSE MILES AND I WILL
BE BURRIED IT IT . SKU

 

More gear ratios can give better acceleration and fuel economy, depending on
what ratios are used. A 5-speed automatic can be a nice improvement for any
vehicle since it could use a numerically higher first gear and a numerically
smaller 5th gear with a nice even spread of gears in between.

Of course it doesn't always turn out that way. In our Durango's 5-speed
auto, I noticed that they left the first three gears all the same as the
previous 4-speed -- they just made 4th gear numerically higher and 5th gear
numerically smaller. Perhaps that was the best thing to do, but I'd rather
have seen all the gears adjusted a bit to improve acceleration.

 

....and poorer reliability and durability, and more distracting shifts, and
less transmission responsiveness.

Not for *any* vehicle, no. There are some vehicles in which 3 or 4 speeds
are completely sufficient.

 

I wish that Chrysler would bring back the old Torqueflite, 3 speed for
the PT Cruiser, or even the Prestomatic Fluid Drive would also be
nice!

 

Really, I didn't experience any significant power in a 3.4L 2005 Impalla
I rented last year.
It suffered from poor gear ratios and a reluctance to downshift 4 to 3,
making it a pain to drive on hilly roads.
A good car for a taxi or a prairie highway cruiser.

 

Triple UGH!

 

Have you ever driven an early sixities or seventies Chrysler with
Torqueflite, it was a great gearbox. Also, have you ever driven
Fluid-Drive? I have it on my 1940 Royal, and I had the dual-range
Prestomatic Fluid-Drive on my 1949 Windsor. It was very smooth and
trouble free. If you have not driven those type of cars, then the
comment is juvenile.

 

Well-mannered, sturdy, dependable, long-lived, efficient, smooth,
quiet...everything a transmission should be, the Torqueflite was. Spam
Hater's "UGH!" is ignorance mixed with marketeering brainwashedness.