Allpar Forums banner

41 - 60 of 169 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
38,073 Posts
What is needed to launch a new 300 won’t happen due to a small market and high costs. The bold 2005 design had two bland restyles which killed much of the 300’s equity, followed by huge discounts that kills the value of the car. It’s not ugly, but it’s not bold any more. I doubt they’ll want to invest enough to turn the trend around.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,996 Posts
I think it's doable, I can't say that it's a wise decision to produce an all new 300 if it takes plant space away from a more profitable product. Especially not if it would overlap with the base model Charger. The money would be better invested in a RWD midsize Dodge sedan IMO to allow them to cover another segment instead of having two overlapping products.

This is going to receive a lot of criticism, but I think it seems more reasonable to build a FWD 300 alongside the Pacifica with extensive cost sharing if possible. 300 would obviously need a bold exterior design, but a lot of interior components could be similar and it wouldn't take assembly space away from higher-margin Dodge products. I'd rather see a FWD 300, the Pacifica, and a Pacifica-CUV built together than the production Portal, Pacifica, and Pacifica-CUV. Other automakers have tried the small MPV idea and haven't had much success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
I think it's doable, I can't say that it's a wise decision to produce an all new 300 if it takes plant space away from a more profitable product. Especially not if it would overlap with the base model Charger. The money would be better invested in a RWD midsize Dodge sedan IMO to allow them to cover another segment instead of having two overlapping products.

This is going to receive a lot of criticism, but I think it seems more reasonable to build a FWD 300 alongside the Pacifica with extensive cost sharing if possible. 300 would obviously need a bold exterior design, but a lot of interior components could be similar and it wouldn't take assembly space away from higher-margin Dodge products. I'd rather see a FWD 300, the Pacifica, and a Pacifica-CUV built together than the production Portal, Pacifica, and Pacifica-CUV. Other automakers have tried the small MPV idea and haven't had much success.
I really dont see anything wrong with a fwd 300. Chrysler was doing fine with the LH cars that had style and luxury. IF they can keep it looking stylish and powerful, I think it will sell well. A sketch was shown on this site a few months ago that looked pretty good. if they can produce it and make it high quality I'll buy one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,727 Posts
I have never been a fan of going back to FWD for the 300 because RWD is what helped set the vehicle apart from the rest of the pack. The question is though, will there be enough sales to justify an all new Chrysler sedan regardless of it being RWD or FWD plus, will there be enough space in production for it to co-exist with whatever "platform" it originates from. Any affirmative answer to those questions seems shaky at best.

I'm sad to see it go, but also pretty happy to see Chrysler put out one of the best darn sedans in history before the segment faded out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,174 Posts
I actually think a rigorous update on the current platform could extend its life within its niche considerably. BUT, if that decision has not already been made, it’s probably too late.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,727 Posts
I think the amount of work needed to update the platform to meet new crash standards would be nearly as costly as a whole new design. The cost isn't likely to be recouped in either case without a major bump in sales. It's the same fate as the Caravan and Journey have along with a host of other long lived vehicles (like the Crown Vic).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
I rather it be done than to take it FWD, either redesign it and keep it RWD, or put it away for a decade, Or make a unique CUV that RWD based out of it. Just dont make it FWD please dont.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,427 Posts
Flying cars are the future. That's what they have been saying ever since I can remember.

In ten years a lot of us Boomers will either be too broke, disabled, or dead to buy cars. With such a large demographic removed from the market, what will people buy? Will people in the younger demographics want to buy the vehicles grandpa or mom drove? Every generation's family bus has fallen by the wayside. The 3-row wagons, custom vans and then the minivan were labeled mom or pop-mobiles by the kids shuffled around in them, and those vehicles are no longer cool.

Right now we are raising a generation of people who only know life through their smart phone. The social media wizards are convincing the younger set into renting electric scooters through some app. What will today's teenagers aspire to drive in the future? Will social media even allow them to have independent aspirations?
Not all young people fit in that stereotype and baby boomers are not the only ones buying CUV’s

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
Is there a future for our 300?
At least ten more years ?
What do you think?
Are you in favor for it?
Your comments will be very important, so please give us your opinions.
Thanks.

ABSOLUTELY!!!! CUVs are the choice of non car oriented types who want bland appliances. Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep have success when they go where everyone else isn't. Instead of trying to out-bland ToyHonSan (a war FCA will NOT win) its better to cater to those who go against the grain. In a world gone touchy feely PC greenie friendly, look at FCA's success stories: All of Ram, burly and rugged Wranglers, completely insane levels of power and machismo in the Challenger and Charger. Yes, soft Jeeps are selling well too but pretty much EVERY crossover is. Even with those, Jeep is still courting the rebellious go against the grain types--or at least people who THINK they are--with those crossovers which still are nothing like the rest of the endless rabble of anonymous beige eggs.

The 300 came out of the gates by being a brash and bold muscular car that wasn't afraid to be 100% American in its flavor. That's whats working for Challenger/Charger...but FCA isn't pushing the 300 like it should be. Yet it's selling at a pretty consistent nearly 50K units every year. Only a moron would walk away from a cash cow like that. 300 needs a reboot, and it needs more than the 345 under the hood. If they even think of downgrading it to another fwd appliance, then best to end the model entirely instead of that humiliation. 300 does the sedan thing better than the Charger, too. I cant see 300 customers moving to the Charger or to some crossover. They'll move up to Audi, Mercedes or BMW first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
If the question being asked is would I buy a 300 if they updated it and continued production then the answer is an unequivocal YES! FCA would however need to keep its identity as that of a car (although I wouldn’t mind a sportback design ala the Kia Stinger). As has been pointed out numerous times, there will always be a market for big sedans. It may not be as big as it once was, but there is still a market for them. As more manufacturers move out of that market the overall pie gets smaller but there are also fewer slices to be made as its divided up for fewer players.

That being said, what do I want to see in this new 300? First off, I don’t want a Dodge Charger clone. The 300 has an identity that I see as being quite different than that of the Charger and I really don’t see them competing head to head. People who say drop the 300 and just keep the Charger for everyone I think are missing something. Many who buy the 300 did NOT cross-shop the Charger. To me, Charger is flamboyant while the 300 is understated, the Charger is flashy while the 300 is elegant, the Charger is sporty while the 300 is luxurious, etc. Now I know everyone won’t echo my opinion here, least of which is FCA who wants to drag me kicking and screaming into believing that the 300 is not a near luxury car but just a people mover (first mistake FCA). Many who shop the 300 cross shop Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln, Genesis, Lexus, Volvo, etc.

So how do you re-do the 300? First, keep with its strengths – striking (yet updated) American design and proportions (that means no to FWD). This was Lincoln Continental’s mistake, it was designed for FWD which gave it odd proportions. Second, continue with an exceptional value proposition. A tremendous strength of the 300 is the level of equipment and technology available. Give it the tablet sized screen, auto parking assist, etc. Just think of what you apparently think are luxuries a new RAM buyer would want and assume a new 300 buyer would want them too. Third, continue to upgrade materials, workmanship, and QUALITY (FCA’s biggest problem). Do something to demonstrate a commitment to quality like 4 yr/50,000 mile warranty like Buick. Fourth, take to heart how often performance is a topic of discussion. Remember the roots of the 300 – a banker’s hotrod. Personally I don’t mind a twin turbo V6, but you need to give the 300 buyer the ability to accelerate from a green light or pass a semi on a two-lane highway with authority. I have the 5.7 (and have had the HEMI in each of my 4 300s – 2005, 2009, 2012, 2018). In 2005 340hp was exceptional. In 2009 the Eagle increased that to 363, a nice bump, but the power has been sitting at that level now for nearly 10 years. Its still responsive, quick, and enjoyable to drive, but the performance numbers of the 5.7 aren’t really exceptional anymore. You see, other manufacturers have continued to develop new and improved engine technology. 0-60 times of 5.5 to 6.5 seconds are not hard to find anymore. The new 300 still needs a base engine in the 300-325hp range but a updated V8 or TT V6 needs to offer something in the 400-425hp range. I am not saying this needs to be an SRT. FCA can’t seem to put a really great engine in a car (like the 392) without dragging spoilers and stripes, cladding, carbon fiber, etc., etc., along with it. Offer the luxury/elegance 300 experience without the Charger/Challenger conversion.

Cost – yes, I know this will cost money, but, FCA, look at the money you’ve saved by NOT really updating the 300 for quite a while. Plus, if you can put $6000+ on the hood of the current 300 and still make a profit, I might suggest you put some of that $6000 into the content and restyling of a new 300 and then you’ll have a thoroughly fresh, new, modern 300 that people will want to buy on its own merits and you can cut back on the incentives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,051 Posts
My .02 is keep and tweek....it is stunningly beautiful right now. Having spent 2 wks in Alberta recently they are everywhere....never seen so many crawling around. That is the 1 vehicle that makes me consider straying from my Ram/Dodge loyalty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,620 Posts
Is there a future for our 300?
At least ten more years ?
What do you think?
Are you in favor for it?
Your comments will be very important, so please give us your opinions.
Thanks.
Yes, to the first and second questions.
This is what I think. In his Motor Trend interview, Steve Beahm indicated the Chrysler brand will now be the "people mover" brand. The 300 does that as a sedan. The next generation 300 should become a better people mover. There should be more attention given to the rear seat environment. If possible give it more legroom and headroom.

Don't go overboard with the center console. The one in the Ford Taurus takes over the whole interior. While I'm mentioning the Ford product, I don't know why the 300 succeeded while the Ford 500/ Taurus and similar Mercury models failed. I don't think it's simply because the Chrysler has rear drive. The Ford 500 started out with bland styling and a wimpy base drivetrain. The Chrysler 300 also was introduced with a wimpy base drivetrain, but had decent optional engines and great styling. The 3.5 V6 with the 4 speed automatic proved a good combination of adequate power and reliability that the Ford's 3.0 CVT combo lacked. When Ford turned the 500 into the Taurus, they lost track of the sedan's mission. In the quest for sportiness the current Taurus sacrifices practicality. The slanted rear roofline is evidence. The EcoBoost V6 failed to present an image for the car.

Certainly the 300 has been improved over the years, but the car always maintained its focus. The next 300 faces two problems. The first is the base interior. It screams cheap. The Charger and Challenger can get houndstooth cloth. I don't know if that would be appropriate for a Chrysler, but there should be something similar. Highlander plaid? The second problem is that it can't be allowed to be lost in a sea of crossovers. The car will need some height, but it can't be cartoonish. The smaller front drive Mercedes look like compact cars on stilts. So does the Fiat 500X when equipped with AWD. The current 300 with AWD doesn't come across that way.

So yes. I'm in favor of it. But, if it gets messed up in the restyle (like Ford did to the 500/ Taurus) and tanks, don't blame me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,688 Posts
If the question being asked is would I buy a 300 if they updated it and continued production then the answer is an unequivocal YES! FCA would however need to keep its identity as that of a car (although I wouldn’t mind a sportback design ala the Kia Stinger). As has been pointed out numerous times, there will always be a market for big sedans. It may not be as big as it once was, but there is still a market for them. As more manufacturers move out of that market the overall pie gets smaller but there are also fewer slices to be made as its divided up for fewer players.

That being said, what do I want to see in this new 300? First off, I don’t want a Dodge Charger clone. The 300 has an identity that I see as being quite different than that of the Charger and I really don’t see them competing head to head. People who say drop the 300 and just keep the Charger for everyone I think are missing something. Many who buy the 300 did NOT cross-shop the Charger. To me, Charger is flamboyant while the 300 is understated, the Charger is flashy while the 300 is elegant, the Charger is sporty while the 300 is luxurious, etc. Now I know everyone won’t echo my opinion here, least of which is FCA who wants to drag me kicking and screaming into believing that the 300 is not a near luxury car but just a people mover (first mistake FCA). Many who shop the 300 cross shop Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln, Genesis, Lexus, Volvo, etc.

So how do you re-do the 300? First, keep with its strengths – striking (yet updated) American design and proportions (that means no to FWD). This was Lincoln Continental’s mistake, it was designed for FWD which gave it odd proportions. Second, continue with an exceptional value proposition. A tremendous strength of the 300 is the level of equipment and technology available. Give it the tablet sized screen, auto parking assist, etc. Just think of what you apparently think are luxuries a new RAM buyer would want and assume a new 300 buyer would want them too. Third, continue to upgrade materials, workmanship, and QUALITY (FCA’s biggest problem). Do something to demonstrate a commitment to quality like 4 yr/50,000 mile warranty like Buick. Fourth, take to heart how often performance is a topic of discussion. Remember the roots of the 300 – a banker’s hotrod. Personally I don’t mind a twin turbo V6, but you need to give the 300 buyer the ability to accelerate from a green light or pass a semi on a two-lane highway with authority. I have the 5.7 (and have had the HEMI in each of my 4 300s – 2005, 2009, 2012, 2018). In 2005 340hp was exceptional. In 2009 the Eagle increased that to 363, a nice bump, but the power has been sitting at that level now for nearly 10 years. Its still responsive, quick, and enjoyable to drive, but the performance numbers of the 5.7 aren’t really exceptional anymore. You see, other manufacturers have continued to develop new and improved engine technology. 0-60 times of 5.5 to 6.5 seconds are not hard to find anymore. The new 300 still needs a base engine in the 300-325hp range but a updated V8 or TT V6 needs to offer something in the 400-425hp range. I am not saying this needs to be an SRT. FCA can’t seem to put a really great engine in a car (like the 392) without dragging spoilers and stripes, cladding, carbon fiber, etc., etc., along with it. Offer the luxury/elegance 300 experience without the Charger/Challenger conversion.

Cost – yes, I know this will cost money, but, FCA, look at the money you’ve saved by NOT really updating the 300 for quite a while. Plus, if you can put $6000+ on the hood of the current 300 and still make a profit, I might suggest you put some of that $6000 into the content and restyling of a new 300 and then you’ll have a thoroughly fresh, new, modern 300 that people will want to buy on its own merits and you can cut back on the incentives.
.

What are its most direct competitors? I think you'd have to go right at them ( FCA would, that is ). Answering that question is important, in my view.

V8 Power? If so, the Genesis G90, for instance, has a N.A. 5.0L V8 clocking-in at 420 HP. That means the 5.7L V8 must, at minimum, directly compete having 480 HP ( if you insist 479 HP ) using Genesis' own HP-per-Litre stock output. ( Or put differently - 84 HP/Litre ). Or better that mark as a justifiable advertising claim. That's not pushing Genesis - vs - Chrysler 300; that's showing RWD V8 power vs RWD V8. I'm supposing there are others in the competitor's pool. Do the same against each to find the minimum threshold.

It would be difficult to sell a newly redesigned 300 which would operate as a mere place-holder. I'd hope you'd try to make it difficult for the competitors.

Avoid the padded vinyl half roof and opera windows and wire wheel hubcaps route ... :p



.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
Is there a future for our 300?
At least ten more years ?
What do you think?
Are you in favor for it?
Your comments will be very important, so please give us your opinions.
Thanks.
I would love for there to be more of the 300. As more and more sedans go away, it gains in value. It will need packages and promotion, neither of which it’s seen in a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,620 Posts
You will need a plug-in charging port for street credibility. The horsepower wars are not that simple anymore. The high end grocery stores, malls, park and ride lots, and office buildings offer special parking spots with charging stations. There is a lot of status in plugging in.

The top of the line powertrain for a next generation 300 should be a PHEV. Tesla changed the rules, but the Pacifica PHEV is mastering them. The 300 should follow suit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Is there a future for our 300?
At least ten more years ?
What do you think?
Are you in favor for it?
Your comments will be very important, so please give us your opinions.
Thanks.
Not only the 300 needs to stay around in rwd but it needs expanded models as the "standard Chrysler" a "Newport" for a base, a 300 for sport an "Imperial" for ultra-luxury and maybe a "Lebaron" for a luxury-sport convertible. Here's a better ideal what I mean;
View: https://youtu.be/pkBBQaT-otk


3-4 models based on one car with the CUVs and minivan taking up the rest..
 
41 - 60 of 169 Posts
Top