[eigib56]

The '05 300 was different from anything out there. It knocked everyone's socks off and sold in big numbers (for a big 4-door), and gave the Chrysler brand credibility. That's what I'd like to see going forward. Not necessarily a remake of the '05, but something different, something bold and distinctive, something that would create interest and showroom traffic. IMHO, that was a big part of what was wrong with the 200 and Dart. They were totally, completely generic. It seemed they were designed to blend in, not stand out. Turn Gilles loose and let's see what happens!

 

[Tony K]

The '05 300 was different from anything out there. It knocked everyone's socks off and sold in big numbers (for a big 4-door), and gave the Chrysler brand credibility. That's what I'd like to see going forward. Not necessarily a remake of the '05, but something different, something bold and distinctive, something that would create interest and showroom traffic. IMHO, that was a big part of what was wrong with the 200 and Dart. They were totally, completely generic. It seemed they were designed to blend in, not stand out. Turn Gilles loose and let's see what happens!

Exactly, with one caveat, it has to have "Toyota" reliability. Make the "IT CAR" (whatever type of vehicle) in it's class, and make it practically bulletproof, with a best-in-class warranty, at a sellable price.

 

[Adventurer55]

The '05 300 was different from anything out there. It knocked everyone's socks off and sold in big numbers (for a big 4-door), and gave the Chrysler brand credibility. That's what I'd like to see going forward. Not necessarily a remake of the '05, but something different, something bold and distinctive, something that would create interest and showroom traffic. IMHO, that was a big part of what was wrong with the 200 and Dart. They were totally, completely generic. It seemed they were designed to blend in, not stand out. Turn Gilles loose and let's see what happens!

Honestly, I don't mean to be disrespectful, but maybe it's time for some new blood for the Chrysler brand design. The word generic keeps coming to mind within the company. Ram looks good, Jeep, the current and even the upcoming ones aren't risk takers at all, and may even look too much alike. I'd like to see what some up and coming designers sketches for a CUV might look like.

 

[valiant67]

I don't think Chrysler's new design language is going to be found looking backwards.
The 300, the PT Cruiser, the cab forward cars were hits in their time but not necessarily a design I'd call timeless like Challenger or Wrangler. Could they share some cues with earlier designs?

 

[Lanciahf]

Bring the box back. No more jelly bean cars. Be distinctive otherwise there is no need.

 

[eigib56]

I don't think Chrysler's new design language is going to be found looking backwards.
The 300, the PT Cruiser, the cab forward cars were hits in their time but not necessarily a design I'd call timeless like Challenger or Wrangler. Could they share some cues with earlier designs?

Didn't mean to imply that the new design language should look backwards. Only referenced the '05 300 because it was a bold departure, and quite risky at the time, but ultimately very successful.

 

[David S]

I don't think Chrysler's new design language is going to be found looking backwards.
The 300, the PT Cruiser, the cab forward cars were hits in their time but not necessarily a design I'd call timeless like Challenger or Wrangler. Could they share some cues with earlier designs?

The 300 and PT Cruiser were looking backwards the day they came out.

The Audi 5000/100 set the tone for all FWD sedans for a decade (the Taurus was a fat Audi). The cab forward LH cars set the pattern twice for all FWD cars going forward to this day. They were truly timeless.

 

[1960d500]

I think Chrysler should take on a Jaguar like design theme. They look great from almost every angle and look very rich.

i think the late 200 and Pacifica front end were design duds didnt look good to me and theres just something wierd about the way the D pillar swopes upward on the mini van that never looked good to me on any vehicle.

where are the images of the cancelled 300 that was supposed to be a real stunner.

 

[Doug D]

LeBaron GTS/GTC should be used for inspiration.

^^^^^This!

I had a '86 Chrysler LeBaron GTS and loved the design. Sporty, yet practical.

We drove the heck out of it. Logged 273K miles before the head gasket blew.

 

[Kyanche]

I feel that when it comes to Chrysler, this forum has regulars that try far too hard to go back to the glory days of the K-Car and 300M, and FWD platforms and stuff.

I think they could try making another attempt at the "Bentley for the middle class" like the 2005 300c was. If there's one thing we still really need right now with EVs, it's distinctive looking ones. Everyone's trying to make a pseudo Model S, or add too much tacky black plastic, or trying way too hard with the aero look.

At the end of the day, Bentley and RR have not given up on upright grilles and tall body panels. I think they could get pretty far with design language like the Flying Spur or Bentayga or the RR Ghost. Heck, when you look at the front end of the Ghost, it kinda looks like they copied Chrysler - it even has the C -shaped DRLs lol.

That, and a kickass RWD convertible like the Dawn would be worth it.

I think people still want large, comfy cars that can scoot. It's just that with so much focus on aerodynamics and stuff, cars have gotten too confined. We have a Cadillac at home and driving that isn't as comfortable as the 300 it replaced - the windshield is way too close! I can see why people would buy an Escalade.

I think the biggest thing holding Chrysler as a brand back, is the presence of Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Like, FCA wouldn't let Chrysler sell a luxury car because Maserati is supposed to be the luxury brand. But I don't think either of those brands would be able to pull off what Chrysler still can.

The funny part is, if they didn't want to commit to EVs and a new platform just yet, they still have a hell of an engine portfolio! You could do a very minor refresh on the 300c, give it a new interior and that giant screen the ram has, and stuff the hellcat V8 under the hood and some new tech and you've got a pretty solid contender.

 

[JeepandRams]

I think making the next 300 look like Rolls Royce, Bentley and whatever it is the car the Russians made for Putin is a good idea.

 

[JeepandRams]

 

[JeepandRams]

I think there is a market for a formal looking more upright car and CHRYSLER 300 replacement should go there.

 

[David S]

I feel that when it comes to Chrysler, this forum has regulars that try far too hard to go back to the glory days of the K-Car and 300M, and FWD platforms and stuff.

I think they could try making another attempt at the "Bentley for the middle class" like the 2005 300c was. If there's one thing we still really need right now with EVs, it's distinctive looking ones. Everyone's trying to make a pseudo Model S, or add too much tacky black plastic, or trying way too hard with the aero look.

At the end of the day, Bentley and RR have not given up on upright grilles and tall body panels. I think they could get pretty far with design language like the Flying Spur or Bentayga or the RR Ghost. Heck, when you look at the front end of the Ghost, it kinda looks like they copied Chrysler - it even has the C -shaped DRLs lol.

That, and a kickass RWD convertible like the Dawn would be worth it.

I think people still want large, comfy cars that can scoot. It's just that with so much focus on aerodynamics and stuff, cars have gotten too confined. We have a Cadillac at home and driving that isn't as comfortable as the 300 it replaced - the windshield is way too close! I can see why people would buy an Escalade.

I think the biggest thing holding Chrysler as a brand back, is the presence of Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Like, FCA wouldn't let Chrysler sell a luxury car because Maserati is supposed to be the luxury brand. But I don't think either of those brands would be able to pull off what Chrysler still can.

The funny part is, if they didn't want to commit to EVs and a new platform just yet, they still have a hell of an engine portfolio! You could do a very minor refresh on the 300c, give it a new interior and that giant screen the ram has, and stuff the hellcat V8 under the hood and some new tech and you've got a pretty solid contender.

You have a bunch on here who try far too hard to go back to the glory days of RWD and Chrysler as a high margin luxury brand that could compete with the Mercedes S class. It will never be accepted as such again. The RWD compact and midsize sedan at margins Chrysler can command is dead. But that isn't about design language. That's about platforms, and there are really 3 in Chrysler's future EMP1/CMP, EMP2 and Giorgio Global.

Plenty of people advocating for the return / continuance of the formal upright brick with poor aerodynamics. voiceofstl, ImperialCrown, Tony K, JeepandRams, freshforged, Lanciahf.

Plenty of people advocating for more sporting designs with good aerodynamics. Tony K, ImperialCrown, David S, Chrysfan, Doug D. I think the name 300 needs to be returned to the sporting side of the house.

As for the K platform it was offered with both formal upright design language and sporting aerodynamic language at the same time. So maybe Chrysler needs two design languages, and 3 platforms (FWD, FWD/AWD, RWD/AWD) to make all of its customers happy. It clearly needs a full lineup restored, and a move into SUVs.

 

[JeepandRams]

Building another “aero” car like Tesla or Mustang Mach E would be a tougher marketplace than a more unique style with the “brutalist” look of the 300 that is already well known . I think there is a hidden market for a more formal car with a taller greenhouse that’s easier to get in and out of. A budget Rolls Royce looking car with the technology could be a home run.

 

[David S]

I think the biggest thing holding Chrysler as a brand back, is the presence of Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Like, FCA wouldn't let Chrysler sell a luxury car because Maserati is supposed to be the luxury brand. But I don't think either of those brands would be able to pull off what Chrysler still can.

I don't see Maserati as holding Chrysler (or Dodge) back. Maserati starts at $50K V6 SUVs. The 300 starts at $30K, the Voyager at $27K. There is no overlap, there should be no overlap, Chrysler should not move upmarket.

I see all kinds of overlap in Alfa and Maserati. Giulia and Stelvio are treading in Maserati territory, and the new small Maserati is a complete overlap with Stelvio.

Given the total sales failure of Giulia/Stelvio I think Alfa needs to go back down into the segments it has been successful in for the past 40 years and leave the luxury/sport segment for Maserati that always held it.

Now once you move Alfa back down into the segments where it belongs, there is all kinds of overlap with Chrysler and Dodge. This is why Alfa needs to go back to Europe and allow Chrysler and Dodge to be restored.

 

[David S]

Building another “aero” car like Tesla or Mustang Mach E would be a tougher marketplace than a more unique style with the “brutalist” look of the 300 that is already well known . I think there is a hidden market for a more formal car with a taller greenhouse that’s easier to get in and out of. A budget Rolls Royce looking car with the technology could be a home run. View attachment 79438

I think 300 sales show that "brutalist" look is a fad that has come and gone years ago.

2005	144,048
2006	143,647
2007	120,636
2008	62,352
2009	38,606
2010	37,116
2011	36,285
2012	78,417
2013	57,724
2014	53,382
2015	53,109
2016	53,058
2017	51,237
2018	46,593
2019	29,214
2020	16,473

As for that Rolls Royce, it looks like an updated Chrysler E class with that laid back waterfall grill. Rolls Royce of the '80s was more upright and '40s to '60s style.

Chrysler E-Class - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[page2171]

Whatever Chrysler's design language is, it needs to be distinctive.

 

[Kyanche]

You have a bunch on here who try far too hard to go back to the glory days of RWD and Chrysler as a high margin luxury brand that could compete with the Mercedes S class. It will never be accepted as such again. The RWD compact and midsize sedan at margins Chrysler can command is dead. But that isn't about design language. That's about platforms, and there are really 3 in Chrysler's future EMP1/CMP, EMP2 and Giorgio Global.

So you think they should come out with another FWD cab forward thing? Wait, how many 300Ms and Neons do you still see on the road? I haven't seen one in about 10 years. lol. Chrysler can't sell a car that appeals to Honda and Toyota buyers because they'll never buy a Honda or Toyota. GM already tried to push the FWD cab forward thing past its deathbed and failed miserably with the Impala/Buick/Cadillacs.

I know that Chrysler HQ (and it seems like a ton of people here) live in Snow Country and therefore are terrified of RWD vehicles, but come on? FWD is dead. Long live FWD.

 

[Tony K]

regulars that try far too hard to go back to the "glory days" of the K-Car

LOL, fixed it for you.

I think the biggest thing holding Chrysler as a brand back, is the presence of Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Like, FCA wouldn't let Chrysler sell a luxury car because Maserati is supposed to be the luxury brand.

AR has no effect on Chrysler. Very different market. Once AR gets its wind, BMW is it's target. Chrysler has never been a competitor to something like Maserati.

Plenty of people advocating for the return / continuance of the formal upright brick with poor aerodynamics. @voiceofstl, @ImperialCrown, @Tony K, @JeepandRams, @freshforged, @Lanciahf.

Plenty of people advocating for more sporting designs with good aerodynamics.@ Tony K, @ImperialCrown, @David S, @Chrysfan, @Doug D. I think the name 300 needs to be returned to the sporting side of the house.

So, which one am I advocating? I agree with the last statement, but I still "like" the LX 300s. I think they look classic. I'm not suggesting they can't/shouldn't morph into something more aero.

Now once you move Alfa back down into the segments where it belongs, there is all kinds of overlap with Chrysler and Dodge. This is why Alfa needs to go back to Europe and allow Chrysler and Dodge to be restored.

Only if you discount the differences in the three brands, especially Dodge and Alfa.