By on May 27, 2009

Three’s a crowd: an odd grouping where someone or something is always going to stick out. Think Holy Ghost. The third wheel. The Sesame Street “which one of these is not the same as the others” object. In our Yank Tank match-up, the Lincoln Town Car fell by the wayside, pilloried for its utter lack of anythingness. Which is also, strangely enough, it’s strength. We’ll get to the Cadillac DTS tomorrow. But as some of our Best and Brightest have already pointed out, the Chrysler 300C is the one that doesn’t fit.

In the four years since its introduction, the 300C has not lost is capacity to impress. The design marks the utter destruction of Chrysler’s cab forward style. And why not? The “Baby Bentley”-meets-gangster-chic look puts all the right bulges in all the right places. Admittedly, the 300C’s rear end is a hair awkward. But the 300C’s dual exhaust pipes ensure that it’s still attractive, in an Ugly Betty kind of way. And seen from any 3/4 angle, the American barge still stirs something primal inside. And why not? Big, bling and brash. Who loves ya baby?

Canadian designer Ralph Gilles’ moment in the sun remains a shining beacon of American sedanery. From its wannabe British grill to the bad ass 20″ rims, this Chrysler exudes the same sort of feel on European roads as a Harley. Everything on the outside of the 300C works, from the chrome mirrors to the low greenhouse and the winged Chrysler badge. But aye, there’s the rub. For this German-American hybrid beauty is but skin deep.

As anyone who’s ever driven a post-Daimler Chrysler is painfully aware, the once and future automaker’s cabins have been the laughing stock of the big, 1.5 ever since they were purchased by the Germans. Somehow, in a world where continual progress is lauded and advancement is seen as the only way to compete, Chrysler managed to do the unthinkable and turn the interior quality clock backwards. I hate to beat a dead horse, but honestly, bludgeoning Mr. Ed in the back seat of a 300 would probably improve the scenery. The rear seats look and feel Police Cruiser chic—although the gun slit windows afford the perps/passengers primo privacy.

While none of our troika can hold an electronic candle to the toys provided by their German and Japanese competition, the Yank tank gadget crown must be awarded at some point. And here we are: the 300C bests the DTS and the Town Car by a wide margin—if you’re willing to pay the price of depreciation. Sorry, admission. Options include AWD, LIDAR cruise control, nav system, remote start, Sirius Backseat TV, AutoConnect Web and auto-dimming headlamps. After viewing the feature list, I’m half surprised Billy Mays isn’t a Chrysler spokesperson. [ED: You got that right.]

If there’s one thing that pre-Fiat Chrysler will be remembered for, it’s the rebirth of the Hemi. Okay, so it’s not a “true” hemi. Doesn’t matter. The 5.7L lump of iron under the 300C’s hood cranks out the best numbers in our Yank tank trio: 360hp and 390 lb·ft of torque. A Mercedes five-speed automatic mates the brawny V8 to the rear wheels. It’s the weakest link: the cog swapper can handle the 300C’s power and is fairly smooth, but the reliability stats give pause. Would a bullet-proof ZF six-speed really have been that much more expensive?

Driving the 300C evokes mixed emotions. It performs like a previous generation Mercedes E-Class on steroids—which it isn’t, really. The chassis is plenty stiff. The suspension’s pliant yet capable. Overall, the big ass barge is delightfully “chuckable.” Crank the wheel and the car responds with uncanny aplomb. Get a little too feisty and the electro-nanny responds with German efficiency (and American leniency). While not quite boaty nor hard, the 300C’s ride quality walks the sober fine line a luxury sedan should.

Slowly but surely, Chrysler has managed to bring one vehicle into the 21st century. Aesthetically. Mechanically. Only they forgot to do something—anything—with the interior. When you combine the dreadful interior with the sobering reality that the 300C looks exactly like the 190hp stripper rental version, a floaty drifty pig of an automobile with no reason to live, you start to ask the inevitable question: am I driving a gussied-up rental? Or is Dollar Rent-A-Car offering a bargain basement luxury car?

The masses have spoken with their wallets. All the performance and gadgets just can’t trump the damage done to the Chrysler brand in general, and the 300’s rep in specific. If the fleet models had never existed . . . If Chrysler had figured-out a way to build an interior to rival well, anyone . . . Instead here we have the Terry Malloy of Yank tanks.

Remember that night in the Garden you came down to my dressing room and you said, “Kid, this ain’t your night. We’re going for the price on Wilson.” You remember that? “This ain’t your night”! My night! I coulda taken Wilson apart! So what happens? He gets the title shot outdoors on the ballpark and what do I get? A one-way ticket to Palooka-ville! You was my brother, Charley, you shoulda looked out for me a little bit. You shoulda taken care of me just a little bit so I wouldn’t have to take them dives for the short-end money.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

55 Comments on “Review: Yank Tank Comparo: Cadillac DTS vs. Lincoln Town Car vs. Chrysler 300C. 2nd Place: Chrysler 300C...”

  • avatar

    This car screams for suicide doors.

    That, and a better interior would make this car a bit interesting.

    Sadly, in stock form, this car is a big yawn.


  • avatar

    In the first pic, it looks like the White House in the background. Is the President still driving a 300C?

  • avatar

    This whole series vividly reminds me why I quit reading car magazines. Only now it’s in the blogs too. There is no escape.

  • avatar

    Great looking car, they did that well.

    Rides like crap.

    Interior is worse than an ’84 Camaro I once owned.

    Funny: I like the “Got Grills?” banner that comes up on the side offering Bentley look-alike grills for this vehicle.

  • avatar

    It looks like crap. Too much gangsterness in the design.

    An Accord is always a better choice.

  • avatar

    I enjoyed the review but I think you dismiss the cab forward cars too quickly.

    The bigger ones were good looking cars that fell short on the details. If they’d refined the designs and been a little bolder they could have been beautiful. Call it “Taurus” syndrome.

    The problem with the 300 is 2 fold.

    The design works well for a big car in a Bentley Rover kind of way but it’s a little cartoony and a bit of a dead end.

    The other problem is not with the 300 itself ,but rather, the unintended consequences. The design dept. took all the wrong cues from it and applied them to the other products creating butt ugly group of cars.

    It makes me appreciate GM’s refinement of the Cadillac designs. But I also think curves are what make car designs work, endure over time, and offer avenues for future refinement.

  • avatar

    # BlueBrat :
    May 27th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    Funny: I like the “Got Grills?” banner that comes up on the side offering Bentley look-alike grills for this vehicle.


    Very funny. And I saw “CHRYSLER Canada Prices
    $5,000-$15,000 off most NEW models + Invoice Prices + Secret Rebates”

    Yeah, very secret. Public forum secret.

  • avatar

    A Mercedes five-speed automatic mates the brawny V8 to the rear wheels. It is the weakest link. The cog swapper can handle the 300C’s power and it’s fairly smooth, but the reliability stats give pause.

    If you have that transmission in an 1998 Mercedes-Benz C43 AMG, that “give you pause” is more like “give you absolutely no forward movement at all” about 5000 miles after the warranty runs out. :-(

    As ridiculously expensive as the transmission is, Mercedes had a special order option (Europe only) for about 2x as much that gave you a combined transmission+LSD mounted in the rear. I think that was the standard transmission on V12 cars.

  • avatar
    Matthew Danda

    My kids need a good view outside otherwise they’d go crazy riding in the back seat (and me too listening to them whine). So I couldn’t even consider it (or a Charger or Magnum for the same reason).

  • avatar

    I’ve rented these from Avis at the Orlando FL airport. Luxury, or even classy, it ain’t.

  • avatar

    I’ve got two issues with the review:

    1) The fleet special, 190HP model doesn’t look “exactly” like the 300C, at least not to the trained eye. Headlights are the most prominent difference.

    2) The interior pictured has since been reworked, I believe for the 2008 model year.

    It’s unfortunate that Chrysler replaced the Concorde, LHS, and 300M with a single vehicle that spans a $20K+ price range (low $20s to upper $40s). Had they also developed a mid-level Concorde replacement, the 300C might have been free, like the 300M before it, to focus on the entry luxury market.

  • avatar

    The lack of full power memory tilt steering wheel and a heated steering wheel should have been a tip that the 300 isn’t in the same class as a DTS.

  • avatar

    08 300C 12000km $21,000 Cdn nice car at that price but oh the interior. Drove a buddy’s for 80 or 90 miles and was so so handling. Got home and into my 99 Camry and found it quieter and far more responsive. No thanks at any price.

  • avatar

    On “Desperate Housewives” I remember that the Marcia Cross character (Bree) drove a Chrysler 300. I wonder how much Chysler spent on this product placement.

  • avatar

    I see 300c’s all over the place here in DC/MD. Seems like sales of these things really took off after Lincoln discontinued the LS.

  • avatar

    To ask the same question I asked in the last episode: “Suitability to what common purpose is being evaluated here?”

    What is the point of comparing and scoring “1, 2, 3” objects that are not interchangeable?

  • avatar

    Ths review strikes me as right on. It is the strippers that make paying North of $40 for what could be a decent car seem ridiculous. Didn’t they have a few Plymouth badges laying around for the Dollar fleet?

  • avatar

    Chrysler LX = RWD
    Ford Panther = RWD
    GM K-Body = FWD

    Why is the DTS the next car in this comparo? It seems like playing duck-duck-goose. The STS seems a better choice to me.

  • avatar

    “I coulda been a contender…” (whine)

    I’D rather have a Hyundai Genesis. Any day of the week.

    Goes for the upscale LTD and Caddicrap, too.

  • avatar

    One other way in which the 300 is unlike the other two: people actually buy the 300. Nobody buys the TC (as a personal vehicle) and I see very, very few DTS’s on the road.

  • avatar

    They also missed the boat by never coming out with the Imperial they teased us with.

  • avatar

    dcdriver wrote:
    One other way in which the 300 is unlike the other two: people actually buy the 300.

    Yeah, the same people who pimp out 15 year old Civics with low-hanging skirts and fart cans. The 300 is the ultimate status symbol in those neighborhoods. I should know, I live in one (please shoot me).

  • avatar

    That thing is ugly. I can sometime focus on some thing good, but its often ugly. Same with most Chargers.

  • avatar

    I made the mistake of embiggening the interior picture. Where’s Barbie?

  • avatar

    My friend has the previous generation 300M. Much nicer interior, with luxurious leather seats (best seats in an old car ever, like the first Jag XK) and sleek styling. I’d take that car over this one anyday.

    Similarly, Lexus seems to be crappifying their interiors as well, since 2006 or so. Sure, these new interiors look more modern and sleek, but the quality and ambiance are missing.

  • avatar

    That’s a very fair review. I’d rank it differently, but I’m the type that would always pass on the nice interior if it means I get the better drivetrain. I’m certainly not the type to even consider a DTS (especially) or Town Car.

    I’d have to partially disagree with your Accord recomendation. I would prefer a 4 cyl. stick Accord to a 6cyl. LX car, so that’s out of the way. I wouldn’t though, pick any of the 6cyl. mainstreamers (even the Accord) over an RT/C. The price and milage are pretty damn close (if not advantage Chrysler), and while the loaded FWD sedans are WAY better on the inside, they just get murdered by the driving experience. This car takes a set and sticks to it in circumstances that’ll leave a FWD sedan crying for mercy. Frankly, I didn’t want to believe it was an American sedan the first time I really drove one.

    That being said, I think the 6 cylinder models are utterly pointless, and that transmission needs to rev match to really complement the advantages the car is trying to capitalize on.

  • avatar

    I’m disappointed that you only wrote two sentences about the engine.

  • avatar

    Much as I like the C, A yank tank is about that quiet boulevard ride and a sumptuous interior. The 300C doesn’t fit the criteria any more than the 1957 300C would. The C is about performance. It has power, handling and an in-your-face kind of attitude. It’s a sports car for secure grown-ups. Chrysler has not made a proper yank tank since the New Yorker got canned after the 1983 model year (thank you Lee Iacocca).

  • avatar

    Oh man, I went back and looked at the interior of the TC in the other review, and I liked it better! And we’re talking of course about a car that was last updated in the Clinton administration (for all intents and purposes).

  • avatar

    I’ve ridden in two. Despite all the options, they interior is horrifying. Thin, plastic covered doors. “Leather” that looks and feels like Grade C vinyl. Disgusting polka-dot pattern “aluminum” centre stack trim. The list goes on. Add vague (understatement) steering and floaty ride and you’ve got a nice Buick competitor, but nothing I’d drive.

    If I wanted the Hemi, I’d go for a used Magnum SRT8 or R/T. Dirt cheap nowadays (last R/T I spotted was 10 500 Canadian with all of 30 000 kms on it), enough for me to overlook the interior.

  • avatar

    I rented one for a few hours last fall. Except for the plastic blanks where optional equipment wasn’t, it was generally unremarkable in how it rode and drove — that is, until I tried to fill the gas tank. The gas tank would not take the filler nozzle. I almost missed my ^(*^&$*#& airplane because I couldn’t fill up the damn rental car.

  • avatar

    The gas tank would not take the filler nozzle.

    That might have something to do with where you tried to fill it up. The new filler holes WILL NOT fit the old leaded gas nozzles. I’m pretty sure, and maybe some else can find a link, but the filler holes size is mandated by the EPA. The OEM’s just follow the size they are told.

  • avatar

    Wow, lots of people down on this car.

    I’d be curious to hear what vehicles people actually recommend in or near this segment.

    Have at it!

  • avatar


    “Wow, lots of people down on this car.”

    that’s because there’s a giant difference between the V-8 and the base models. There’s nothing, literally, to recommend the slow ones. They had an initial take of over 50% on the Hemi actually, there never should have been a stripper model.

    If you had to get a FWD alternative I’d go for the Passat CC stick (2.0T). Nothing else is nice enough to make up for the wrong wheel drive and lack of power.

  • avatar

    great read.
    Not a bad car…..
    enough said!

  • avatar

    “I’d go for the Passat CC stick (2.0T)”

    c’mon….somebody’s got to hate that recommendation. Any takers?

  • avatar

    “An Accord is always a better choice.”

    What is this, Consumer Reports? Jeez, you need to go a car with a real V8 once in a while just to remind yourself why people actually like cars.

  • avatar

    I have an ’08 300C AWD. You either like the design or you don’t. To me it’s a classy and elegant look. The six cylinder cars make no sense other than for amortization. You can’t stop the future felons of America if they want to bling out a 4k. lb. sedan with a 2.7L 178 hp. V6 and 22″ wheels. As far as the stripper being identical to the C, it’s not, for too many reasons to list. The 300C does indeed have power memory seats, pedals,mirrors,steering wheel (tilt&telescope) The interior was restyled for ’08. The materials are ok. The fit&finish are good too. The new all black leather interior and led lighting are an improvement over the pre ’08 models. It’s not as nice as a $60K BMW or Mercedes but the 300C doesn’t compete with them, nor would those buyers shop Chrysler. The 300C is a 7 Series size, rear/all wheel drive, V8 powered car that offers all or more of the technical features that the more expensive cars have, for far less money. Adaptive cruise control and AWD (FourMatic) work exactly as advertised. Mercedes charges thousands more for them. I see a clean-looking, form follows function, user friendly instrument panel/center console. Why is it that Acura, Infinity, and BMW, albeit with higher quality materials, feel it necessary to make things so much more complicated? For example the 300C offers most all of the new Acura TL’s features but the Acura’s IP resembles the space shuttle. Complexity for the sake.. The 5.7 is as smooth and powerful as any OHC engine and with 400 lb/ft of torque it’s performance is well documented. The interior photos should have been of 2008 & up models. Why write about the 300C and show the 6 cyl. car? For clarification my last family car was a ’97 Grand Caravan!! (I hear you laughing) That’s my opinion. I could be/am biased!

  • avatar

    Is the President still driving a 300C?

    Obama isn’t driving anything now. But when his hypocrisy caught up to him during the campaign, he swapped the 300C for a Ford Escape Hybrid.

  • avatar

    “It’s unfortunate that Chrysler replaced the Concorde, LHS, and 300M with a single vehicle that spans a $20K+ price range (low $20s to upper $40s). Had they also developed a mid-level Concorde replacement, the 300C might have been free, like the 300M before it, to focus on the entry luxury market.”

    Yes, because Chrysler used to know how to do that. Especially in the years right after they dropped the DeSoto brand, Chrysler covered everything from Dodge up to Imperial price ranges. They had the Newport, the 300 Sport series, the New Yorker, and the 300 letter cars. Each had a different grille, different side and rear trim, and different interiors. It was easy to tell that the Newport was the low line and the New Yorker was the high line, inside or out.

    Perhaps there were too many years in which the engineers spent too much time and effort trying to build cars to ever-changing government requirements and not enough to market requirements.

  • avatar

    …and let me add that the low-line Newports were pretty nice cars in their own right, not rental-car crap like the cheap 300s we see now.

  • avatar

    I’m almost certain that anyone here who OWNS a 300C will be VERY HAPPY WITH THEIR CARS.

    I own a 2006.

    When I first saw the 300C I hated it cause I thought it was a ripoff Bentley. But when my friend bought one and lost his license to a DUI, I got enough time behind the wheel to appreciate it.

    The interior, back in 2004, was decent because back then, interiors were still plasticy. Think back to the plastic Escalade interior as well as the plasticy interiors of most SUV’s of the time.

    The 300C back then looked better than most cars of the time.

    Had Chrysler upgraded the interior a long time ago (for 2006) this one major criticism could have been avoided. But still…most 300 drivers don’t care about the interior quality.

    They care about their engines.

    A 300C or a 300C SRT8 is pretty hard to hate when you can shoot from 0 – 60 in less than 5 seconds.

    The SRT8’s seats are awesome and the 08 300’s offer lots of tech stuff such as Adaptive cruise control, smart key fobs and a slightly higher grade cup holder design.

    I love my car. Its extremely spacious even for big people – like a low riding SUV. In fact, Chrysler 300’s have more interior space than most CUV’s on the market. I’m 6’7 and I drive this and a S550 because these are the only cars I fit in and can get comfortable in.

  • avatar

    Chrysler should have kept the 300M and redesigned it with the 3.5L and the optional 5.7 HEMI.

    the 300M isn’t an ugly car – I see lots of late models on the road and they have a pretty sharp look to them that could have been updated to run with newer 4 door coupes like the VW CC.

  • avatar

    Judging by the amount of people saying they’d rather have a (insert foreign vehicle here) as opposed to this vehicle, I belief it’s safe to say that this is the embodiment of an American vehicle. If a vehicle can elicit this much hate out of the import crowd I know I want it.

  • avatar

    a few years ago when they started selling them here in RHD, i checked them out and thought the interior was quite well built with good materials. i believe the RHD models are built in Austria though, perhaps they’re of a better standard

  • avatar

    The design marks the utter destruction of Chrysler’s cab forward style.

    I think this was a mistake by Chrysler. The 300C has it’s place, but why dump a relatively successful line of vehicles for this?

    I still see many LS vehicles on the road today, all be it looking quite rough. They were very roomy inside and with refinement could compete head to head with the supersized Accord/Camry cash cows.

    Instead all Chrysler has is a bloated RWD platform with styling that will instantly turn away +50% of buyers and a FWD Sebring platform that isn’t on par with the original Dodge Intrepid from the early 90’s. A niche product for the full sized market and a garbage product for the midsized? Epic failure.

  • avatar

    Has anybody found it amusing that the Google ad next to the editorial is from a company that has “OVER TWENTY STYLES OF GRILLES FOR YOUR 300…”?

    That says volumes about what the car is all about.

  • avatar

    I often find it hard to tell a base stripper Camry or Accord from a top line model. Other than V6 models with dual exhaust and alloy wheels vs plastic covers there is nothing to separate them so that argument really doesn’t stand today. The loaded V8 Hemi models usually have wood steering wheels, chrome wheels, dual exhaust, chrome insert bodyside moldings and much more visual flash than the base 2.7 liter models. I can tell them apart from a mile away in the car dealerships. Try looking at rows of Sonatas or Accords and telling which model is which. You have to be standing behind the car and see the exhaust or letter designations to know one apart from another. When I see a Town car, 300C or DTS, I instantly know what I’m looking at and they have far more presence going down the road than most of the plain boring generic blandmobiles made today. Case in point- my best friends 13 year old son saw a new Hyundai Genesis driving by and had no clue what he was looking at. Was it a entry level Mercedes, a low end BMW, a Lexus. He had no clue and thought the car looked like a cheaper model of some foreign luxury car because the exterior was so plain and devoid of any chrome, trim or flash and the styling is so derivative. Whenever he sees a Caddy, Lincoln, 300 or Charger he can identify them instantly. For a kid to recognize an American car whenever he sees one speaks spades about how poor many of the foreign makers are doing at brand identity or lack of it.

  • avatar


    I agree with what you said.

    I took a friend to buy a new Accord 08′ and I forced her to get foglamps/ navigation/ moonroof and the V6.

    Now she realizes how to tell her higher level Accord from all the lower level Accords by checking for fog lamps and dual exhaust.

    I think most companies now try to build their cars with obvious identifies (besides the japanese) of trim level.

    It has always been that Mercedes Benzes could be told apart by the number on the back (S400, S430, S500) etc – and this was actually a way of “grading” other drivers on the fly. Nowwith so much aftermarket modifications I guess it becomes more and more difficult to simply guess.

  • avatar

    commando1 :
    May 28th, 2009 at 9:36 am

    Has anybody found it amusing that the Google ad next to the editorial is from a company that has “OVER TWENTY STYLES OF GRILLES FOR YOUR 300…”?

    That says volumes about what the car is all about.

    Well, I’ll tell ya what…I’ll slap a custom grill on the front of an SRT-8, and you won’t have to worry about EVER seeing it.

  • avatar

    Flashpoint :
    May 27th, 2009 at 11:27 pm

    Chrysler should have kept the 300M and redesigned it with the 3.5L and the optional 5.7 HEMI.

    A 360-HP front drive car?

    No wonder your friends call you “Torque Steer.” :)

  • avatar

    Dykes says:

    “But as some of our Best and Brightest have already pointed out, the Chrysler 300C is the one that doesn’t fit.”

    Well, heck, considering that it will do 0-60 in five in a half, and features handling that won’t be confused with the Exxon Valdez, you’re right – the 300C doesn’t fit with a DTS or Town Car.

    In terms of size, power, and capability, the 300C fits in more with a 5-series BMW or E-Class Benz.

  • avatar

    Chrysler screwed the pooch when it decided a car with gunslit windows and a beltline as high as the driver’s shoulder would attract more customers.

    The weird thing is that Chrysler never seems to learn that weird style turns away customers. Think of the Airstream and goofy cars like the ’62 Dodges and Plymouths. Distinctiveness is not always a virtue.

    If the stylists who penned this cartoonish design, and the managers who approved it for production, have not been fired, then Chrysler better switch from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7.

  • avatar

    A “Yank Tank” comparo and the Town Car not only doesn’t finish first, it’s DEAD LAST???

    The 300C barely even registers on this comparison anyway. Compared to a Town Car, it drives like a cheap Mercedes.

    The DTS is a FWD turd. I just drove a 2006 with 22K miles on it the other day that was falling apart literally and drove accordingly. Worn down climate control and radio knobs, blown struts, exhaust leak, and cabin noise rivaling my 1989 C1500. And what SOFT seats? The leather ones in the DTS I drove were comparable in softness to a concrete bench.

    The Town Car’s sole remaining body-on-frame rear-wheel-drive sedan platform dates back to 1979, good for half a million miles, with unmatched crash test ratings, acres of hood and trunk, comfort of driving your living room sofa, how much more “yank tank” can you get than that?

    Not that I’d know anything about “yank tanks”, I’ll go crawl back into my Roadmaster now.

  • avatar

    I test drove a 300C once – a few weeks before buying a brand new 2006 300C SRT8. [A car that I still own to this day] So I can not say from experience what the 300C is like to drive – but I can tell just how fantastic I think the 300C SRT8 is. And unless there truly is a ‘night and day’ difference between the regular ‘C’ and the ‘SRT8’ – I find it hard to believe that the 300C is THAT bad. The SRT8 is a wonderful car. It’s very comfortable and VERY fast. It’s quiet when you are just cruising along and sounds wonderful whenever your having fun with it. It handles very well and has fantastic brakes. It has also been perfectly reliable. [Imagine that] OK – sure – the SRT8 isn’t just a 300C with a sticker – it’s been upgraded considerably. But still…… And yes – the interior materials chosen [BY MERCEDES] are quite cheap looking – but everything is put together well. And nothing is falling apart or falling off. Given the opportunity to go back in time – I would STILL end up buying my 300C SRT8.

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote


  • Contributors

  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Alex L. Dykes, United States
  • Kamil Kaluski, United States
  • Seth Parks, United States
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Kyree Williams, United States

Get No-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners Automotive News in your Facebook Feed!

Already Liked