Allpar Forums banner

41 - 60 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: World14

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
The "upright brick" LX 300 had better aerodynamics than the LH models that came before it.
Wrong.

2013 LX 300 Cd .334, Present LX 300 Cd .320, LH 300M .31, LH Concorde Cd .288.


Then you have to take into account the lower frontal area of the LH. Much lower drag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,207 Posts
I think there is certainly a place for a more 'formal' design language at Chrysler. It really is what they do well, and Stellantis has nothing in that space, car wise, to compete with Cadillac and Buick. The original 55 Engels chryslers were classic IMO, so were the 64-66 Chryslers and Imperials, 69-74 Chryslers and Imperials, the original LHS and intrepid/eagle/concord, as well as the LX's. All were more classically styled Chryslers and all sold well, HMMM? If they could stretch the L and give it a little more rear seat, move to an AWD PHEV with the 3.6, They could sell it all over the world as a "Black Car' without substantially altering the profile or the look of the car. Call the stretched version Imperial, and the standard version New Yorker. Save the 300 name for something else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
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.
Given current fuel economy footprint regulations they need to go with shorter front and rear overhangs. The windshield should not go forward of the firewall. There is no need for a V6 to get 255 or 300 hp, a transverse 4 cylinder is fine. Given those changes they should update the 1998 Concorde.

Obviously when you are talking about a 15 - 25 year old non high performance car there won't be many survivors, that is true for any brand. That said the high school girl down the street got a Dodge Stratus for her first car, they are still around.

Chrysler made competitive FWD cars before, now that they have access to the PSA EMP platforms and aren't tied to the uncompetitive Mitsubishi and Fiat platforms they can do it again.

Large cars are dying. Don't point to large cars and make predictions about small and midsize cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
I think there is certainly a place for a more 'formal' design language at Chrysler. It really is what they do well, and Stellantis has nothing in that space, car wise, to compete with Cadillac and Buick. The original 55 Engels chryslers were classic IMO, so were the 64-66 Chryslers and Imperials, 69-74 Chryslers and Imperials, the original LHS and intrepid/eagle/concord, as well as the LX's. All were more classically styled Chryslers and all sold well, HMMM? If they could stretch the L and give it a little more rear seat, move to an AWD PHEV with the 3.6, They could sell it all over the world as a "Black Car' without substantially altering the profile or the look of the car. Call the stretched version Imperial, and the standard version New Yorker. Save the 300 name for something else.
The original Concorde (1993) was a low drag design with a Cd of .31. It was a breakthrough modern design, nothing formal about it. The best sales years for the Intrepid were '95,'96, '99 and '00, both generations sold equally well when new to the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
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.
The US is 51% AWD 40% FWD and 9% RWD, and a good proportion of that RWD figure is pickup trucks.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
CHRYSLER‘s upcoming design language is going to be rebadged DS and Peugeot. The real reason to save CHRYSLER and Lancia is to sell more than 60k DS cars a year.
79463
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
CHRYSLER‘s upcoming design language is going to be rebadged DS and Peugeot. The real reason to save CHRYSLER and Lancia is to sell more than 60k DS cars a year. View attachment 79463
A midsize 508 cannot be turned into a full size 300. If this is the midsize 5 door then it is the LeBaron GTS. The car you need to photoshop to make a 300 is the DS 9 on a 4" longer wheelbase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Too many people are caught up in styling cues and do not understand platforms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony K

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
I own a 300S and Buick Tourx.
I love my 300 but my wife loves her Buick.She loves the station wagon like styling and the all wheel drive. She also loves the fact we havent seen another Tourx around. While the style of the Buick is nice,the station wagon shape limits the cargo shape and size. We didnt want another minivan or a me too SUV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
I own a 300S and Buick Tourx.
I love my 300 but my wife loves her Buick.She loves the station wagon like styling and the all wheel drive. She also loves the fact we havent seen another Tourx around. While the style of the Buick is nice,the station wagon shape limits the cargo shape and size. We didnt want another minivan or a me too SUV.
The station wagon shape is the best for cargo without giving up the low center of gravity of a car and protection of a roof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
Discussion Starter #59
Rebadging Chryslers from PSA
No. No. Why do we accept this and promote it? Why do we accept these HORRIBLE rebadges and the very idea of them. Chrysler is a fantastic brand that deserves much better then STUPID rebadges. CHRYSLER can be the design leader here. Use the platforms/chassis that need to be shared, but build a unique body over the top It doesn't have to be a rebadge. We as Chrysler enthusiasts don't need to accept this cruddy rebadge talk all the time.

That is devaluing the brand. It needs to stop.

By the way JeepandRams, I am not picking on you specially, just the idea you/and others have presented relating to this. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,514 Posts
No. No. Why do we accept this and promote it? Why do we accept these HORRIBLE rebadges and the very idea of them. Chrysler is a fantastic brand that deserves much better then STUPID rebadges. CHRYSLER can be the design leader here. Use the platforms/chassis that need to be shared, but build a unique body over the top It doesn't have to be a rebadge. We as Chrysler enthusiasts don't need to accept this cruddy rebadge talk all the time.

That is devaluing the brand. It needs to stop.

By the way JeepandRams, I am not picking on you specially, just the idea you/and others have presented relating to this. ;)
Some people think this problem has to be solved "yesterday" so quickly rebadging Peugeots that are presumably already federalized is the only option. I agree, it's neither the only option, nor is it so time sensitive to be life-threatening to Chrysler. Second, your (lots of folks here) thinking in terms of platforms is a decade expired. We don't design cars like that anymore, as it has been explained to me. Don't have to, and it's not optimal. In other words, we're not limited to taking a Peugeot, "cutting" the body off the floorpan so to speak, and putting a Chrysler body on top. Not because it can't be done, but, for example, because what may work best for the floorpan in an LX sedan (or here a Peugeot crossover) might be less optimal for an LX CUV (or Chrysler crossover for the NA market). Not to mention, Chrysler wouldn't have the same requirements for pedestrian collision mitigation that a Peugeot would have. This explains the optimization some. Optimization in the Automotive Industry
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_690
41 - 60 of 73 Posts
Top