Buzzwords like “breakthrough”, “paradigm” and “integration” are management Viagra. They give ignorant execs and clueless PR folk the power to appear talented. But no word sets the flack-talker’s soul afire like “synergy.” And no other word was deployed more often to justify the merger of Daimler-Benz with Chrysler. But what happens when you synergize top-dollar Mercedes underpinnings with Chrysler engineering and sell it for the price of a Camry? I’ll give you 300 guesses.
Judging by its looks, the Chrysler 300 is still a winner. The chopped roof, crisp overhangs, Audi TT-esque fender flares and jeweler’s grade front fascia are still the stuff of urban legend. The SUV-like stance (generated by a sky-high beltline) and K-car influenced rear deck further distinguish the big Chrysler from the Boyz in the bland. Personally, I find this flying brick (with a drag coefficient to match) a far cry from Bentley sedans and vintage 300’s. Put another way, who stole a Checker Marathon and ran it through a wind tunnel?
Too bad that chunky profile only looks solid. Rest your butt on the front end, lean back and give your best “mean mug” for the camera and the front clip flexes and twists in disapproval. Ditto the back bumper: rest a box before loading the trunk and the 300’s posterior sags like the rack of a middle-aged supermodel.
The Chrysler 300’s interior continues the cheap and not-so-cheerful theme. Aside from tight panel gaps and soft polymers above the dashboard equator, the cabin is awash in the kind of flash cast plastics “enjoyed” by owners of Hyundai’s Excel. The 300’s cabin serves-up a farrago of bargain basement materials: from hard, nasty armrests to a vinyl-wrapped steering wheel. The 300’s thrones were designed by the folks at Slip n’ Slide, complete with leather inserts that are virtually indistinguishable from their vinyl surroundings. The optional Boston Acoustics’ boombox is as clear as it is loud– provided you remain in front.
Hop in the back and the sound quality flies out the window, right after the delightful gong resonance made by closing the rear portals. The 300’s backseat is best reserved for short trips with short people; everyone else leaves the 300’s lean rear cushions tired and stressed after a lengthy interstate odyssey. The trunk’s shallow, oddly-shaped cargo hole and the overly aggressive assist-struts on a zero-leverage deck lid do nothing to help the family car basics. There’s but one shining [three pointed] star in the 300’s cabin: a cruise control stalk with all the precise, perfectly weighted feel of a Mercedes’ part– donated to an otherwise lost cause.
Throw the 300 into some switchbacks and you can tell where the car’s manufacturer spent their money. The 300’s independent (front) and five-link (rear) suspension is a distant cousin to the old E-class. Tweaked by the Dark Lords of DCX and bolted onto to a stiff chassis, the greasy bits provide plenty of poise for one so portly (3800 pounds). Boot the package in a corner and 250lb-ft of torque sends the 300’s rear tires dancing in delight– moments before the ESP flashes a warning that this isn’t an E63 AMG and you aren’t Michael Schumacher (or Jay Shoemaker).
Even with the handling Nanny in attendance, the 300 is a wonderful mix of raucous handling and reassuring ride. The 300’s Chris-Craftian tiller has way too much rim for spirited maneuvers, but the power-assisted rack and pinion steering provides reasonable feel for a passenger sedan aimed squarely at the over-40 set. With 55-series tires on hand (ironically enough), the Chrysler’s ride is 401K-compliant, splitting the distance between BMW’s teeth chattering firmness and the roll and pitch of a Toyota Camry.
Even without the hemispherical hot tamale under the bonnet, the 300's no slouch. The sedan’s 3.5-liter high-output SOHC V6 may not stand a chance against the latest hi-po six-pots, but 250hp hooked-up to a reasonably responsive five-speed autobox ensures that the 300 gets out of its own way without unnecessary delay, thirst (19/27) or embarrassment. (Which is more than you can say for the base by name base by nature 2.7-liter V6.)
Taken as a whole, the 300 is proto-synergy. When first mooted, the Daimler Chrysler combo was touted as a ”merger of equals,” blending German engineering with American style. Instead of blowing away the competition with anal retentive engineering and unassailable build quality, the Chrysler 300 is a half-baked half-breed: a car with excellent bones, a flash exterior, a dreadful interior and dubious build quality.
Props to the 300 for reinvigorating American car design, finding tremendous popularity and more than paying its way. But it’s time for DCX to update this bad boy or build something that fulfills the merger’s original premise. Otherwise, the 300 is destined to become a textbook case of a synergistic failure to turn hype into reality.
99 Comments on “Chrysler 300 Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Mr. Metha, I own one of these things and yes there are no perfect cars. All rear wheel drive cars lose 20% of their space to front drive configuration. Look at the tight insides of BMW or mercedes compared to the space in say avalon, or buick. To get the size you ask for in the rear seat, chrysler is stretching the car 6 inches for livery ues. There is no other way to engineer the thing. Or you trade in the handling for space in the FWD. As for the interior at $33,500 the 300C lists for less than the best avalon (with a nicer interior). They would need an upscale model of the 300 at about 38K to do the proper interior. As for build quality, a new bentley (circ $190K) has a plastic front fascia as do countelss other cars. The day of building any of these things out of all steel is over. How any of the modern cars will look after say ten years is debateable. I remember when the old “iron jobs” cancered out before the payment book expired. So chrysler has only done what the rest have to stay current in build quality. I do know this I am 6′4″ and I fit in the front of the 300 and the back with the seats rearward, it is far tighter in my relative’s new E class Benz (circa 55K). Given the Benz rides and handles better than virtually any other car, I can’t buy it. I need the S class to approach the interior of the 300 (and thats circa85K). So yes the Chrysler has worts but what better driving thing to have at 33K.
they are all over the place in philly – usually all blinged out with 20 ” chrome wheels, blacked out windows, bad lookin grills, they are cool lookin.
I would never buy one. The beltline is so high, it is claustrophobic inside. And it does not drive so well. And I don’t need a family sedan.
This is one of the cars that I like to look at from the outside, but are less enjoyable from the inside. Like the new Mustang, for instance.
The thing is ugly. They should have just made it a fastback and named it the Hudson Hornet. The greenhouse (glass area) is way too small, just as the Hudson was in it’s day.
Actually, they would have done far better to have taken a look AT the 1948-1954 Hudsons. Tons of room, yet rear wheel drive.
They could have taken the interior dimensions, fitted a version of the current Mercedes S-class chassis (why not take advantage of reducing the costs by increasing production of the same parts?) and given it a little more class, and a lot more glass….. and a quality interior.
Another competent, honest review from TTAC. I guess what depresses me reading it is that it would take DCX so little to put this car to the head of the class. Improve the quality of interior materials and consistency of their build. That’s it. The resources that were spent on developing the Aspen would have been sufficient.
I still think DCX really hit the mark with this one. While it may not be best-in-class, I think the combo of bold styling (to get you in the door) and reasonably good handling (to seal the deal) are enough for most people to consider it, especially since it can stroke certain buyers’ “Buy Amerikaner, Build Amerika” sensibilities at the same time.
But IMHO the styling has not aged well over the past few years. Maybe it’s just the effect of mass acceptance, but they just don’t turn my head anymore. Not even the ones–as about 50% of them are here in Birmingham, land of donks, bubble, and boxes–black on black on black on 20″ chrome (stock suspension, mind you).
One last note about rear suspension sag: This is very common these day. It appear that manufacturers are attempting to make the car sit level with only the driver inside (10 years ago, butt-in-the-air was more common). In turn, load up the rear and watch the sidewalls tuck under the rear fender lip. With no steering in the rear, suspension travel can be relatively unlimited, so with a full load, butt-drag is common (worst offenders: Altima and Maxima)
A couple of years ago I got to test drive the 300C at Amelia Island Concours (Missed the chance to hammer the Maybach), and your review is right on.
The interior has that “cheap stuff that tries to look expensive” all over. The “tortoise shell” on the steering wheel and armrests is horrific. They would have done better with plastic “wood” over this crap.
The steering wheel controls look OK, but they’re also plastic, not the brushed metal they are imitating. And it shows in the feel. Junk.
But, oh man, that Hemi is Sweeet. Drop the hammer and it does a passable imitation of a 440 Super Commando. I’ll forgive lots of faults for that motor.
Agreed SherbornSean, The 300 is about a 90% effort.
Good news is that the next makeover should fix some of the cost-cutting bits since it actually made some money for DCX.
Sajeev, please remember in what league the 300 plays. They start at 23k list with okay equipment – knock 2k off that for negotiation. They go into the 30s but that is loaded out, again drop 2 to 3k. So basically we are playing in Camry/Accord/Altima territory for comparison purposes. Not 3 series or Lexus, but basic transportation. So lets see … the Camry and Accord are what?…… boring as all hell! My refrigerator looks good in comparison to these.
I went down to check out the new 07 Altima. It was fairly decked out. Hard plastics, inferior radio, dysfunctional nonintuitive tilt/telescope lever, hit & miss exterior (rear hits, front misses), not comfortable, crude leather workmanship, boring dash. Unimpressed.
There was a Toyota dealer next door, so I popped into an 07 Camry SE V6 and found hard rental car grade plastics, misfitting dash parts, better leather than the Altima but not as nice as my brother’s 300, another boring as hell dash, soccer-mamma styling, it pulled right when I punched it. Again, unimpressed.
Current Accord? Ugly and vanilla as sin, boring as hell, again nothing special inside (although better than the Camry), but unimpressive. I think it was the Accord, Whirlpool edition.
I have sat in, rode in, and driven the 300M. Against the CamCords out there, it is a hoot to drive. The dash is tight and makes a great impression compared to others in its class, and the car is roomy enough for most. The seats are great.
Outside, at least you’ll get noticed and I dare you to lay across and jump on the hood of a Camry or Accord and see if the hood is umblemished. Heck, for that matter go jump on the hood of a 7 series or Bentley and take a sledgehammer to it and see if the owner laughs at how undentable the rattrap is.
Holding cars up to such standards is not The Truth About Cars, it is simply listing anything and everything there possibly is to complain about cars. My ex-wife was like that, too.
ash78, are you AL or MI? If it’s AL most of those pimped 300s probably left the dealer that way. Stop by Drennan sometime and check out their selection of 300s with the “Bentley” and “Rolls” grilles and 20’s or 22’s. And of course the chrome door handles, and the additional $5K sticker attached. I think they had more pimped than unpimped there. But I wasn’t really counting since I was looking at the Jeeps. Don’t get me started on the pimped Jeeps.
I was looking closely at a Dodge Magnum (a more bread and butter version of the 300) when I was on the market for a utility focused vehicle. I drove all 3 models, the R/T with the v8, the middle version with the 3.5 liter v6, and the 2.7 liter v6. Driving impressions was it handled better than I expected but the 2.7 and even the 3.5 could not really motivate such a heavy car. The R/T was a blast to drive with a nice little rumble reminding you that a nice powerplant sits ahead of you.
Then I tried to change lanes and couldn’t see worth a damn. In fact it was so hard to wretch my head around to see anything I would switch the side view mirrors to give me the blind spot but of course that stopped me from seeing properly from the side rear so I’d have to switch back and forth. In fact on busy roads with me changing lanes I was let down by the fact that driving this thing remotely aggressively without any good vision was too difficult and that pretty much sealed my consideration for this car / platform. I’ve been a function > form follower for years. If only the car was more driver friendly (seems they spend most of their time making it look cool). After returning I did note that they had these stickers on the cars with red ones noting which cars have sat there for over 4 months (only the R/T models sell on average of 3 months). Not too good of a turnaround for a supposed hot model. (This was 2 years ago when these were fairly new).
Oh, praise da lord! I thought I was the only one in the universe who thought the 300C was ugly.
Load the trunk with some heavy boxes and the 300’s posterior sags like the rack of a middle-aged supermodel.
I agree that this is not a fair comment. Isn’t this because it has springs?
What other full-size rear-drive V6 American cars are there again?
Every time I see a 300, I think “Gawd, that is ugly”. I realize that there are some redeeming qualities, but I absolutely refuse to drive something even I think is ugly.
rodster205
Right here in your area code! I had no idea Drennan was pimping out the 300 right off the lot. Different strokes…but I think we can all agree that dealer-installed pimpage is the lowest form of modification. Altimas with billeted grilles, I’m also looking at you. I work downtown, so part of my commute is my duty as an amateur donk-watcher with my trusty cameraphone.
The Chrysler dealer in my area also “pimps” the cars on their lot. I’ve seen 300’s with the 2.7 V6 fitted with chrome grilles, wheels, trim around the doors and wheel wells selling for about $26,000.00. They’ve also added 20″ wheels to Asspens and added even more chrome to that already guady exterior. And Chrysler isn’t the only one doing it.
I live in a small city but it’s intensely urban so all of the dealers are “pimping” their cars. Chevy dealers with pimped Assalanches, HHRs, Silverados and Impalas….Ford dealers with pimped F150s, Expeditions and Five Hundreds….Nissan dealers with pimped Armadas and Maximas….it just doesn’t end. I understand why they do it, but it’s a shame that they have to.
I declare shananigans on Sajeev on account of his failure to use “spizzarkle” on a Chrysler 300 review! How dare YOU sir?!
This review just caused me to cringe once again over the fact that the Lucerne isnt RWD with an AWD option. Is it just me or would most of use look at that car in a whole different light with RWD?
I rented a 300 touring a few weeks back.
I was actually reasonably impressed. It was a DECENT CAR. The places where I expected mold flash I didn’t see (just coming out of a new PT Luzer a couple days before), and it was big and solid. My backseat passanger for short trips was comfortable.
Yeah, its not an Audi or Mercedes interior, but I found it just as nice as the Camry’s I’ve rented, while being bigger. It served me well for 500 miles of cruising through the Illiana cornfields.
And I can see the 300-Long totally trouncing the town-car in the car-for-hire market: better mileage, equal room, better handling, and the trunk is not that bad, its pretty big, and nice and flat, although you’d have to work to put your requisite 3 corpses in.
I hope this “pimping out” is just a passing fad, just like the solid whitewalls and rubber on chrome bumper guards where fads that eventually (and mercifully) ran their course.
Good review. You said what needed to be said. I hope DC listens. (Doubt it.)
“I hope this “pimping out” is just a passing fad,…”
Is it profitable? If so…
I think the reviewer may have been a little hard on the 300. I’ll not say that the 300 is perfect, but it is one of the very few ‘American’ cars I would even consider owning.
The interior may not be perfect, but it’s comfortable (at least from the drivers seat). The car handles very much like a german car. The styling is starting to age, but at least it’s distictive (anyone want to go back to 1995 when every car on the road looked like a jelly bean?). I think, overall, the 300 is a nice package for the money.
Like stated above, you can get a distictivly styled, nice Handling, RWD sedan for Accord/Camry money… that’s a success in my book.
I sincerly hope that DCX will continue to develop the 300 and not just let it rot on the vine. I think they have a real winner, but it will take continued development to keep it that way.
The word farrago sure is used with uncommon frequency on this website. Coincidence? I think not.
I agree that this is not a fair comment. Isn’t this because it has springs?
The meaning got lost in editing. Sorry about that. The rear end sags if you put a box on the bumper, before dumping it into the trunk. Its a thin, flimsy part just like the front clip. There isn’t a single Chrysler 300 I’ve seen on the road that doesn’t have a rear bumper that jiggles with only a little grab from the top.
What I’m trying to say is, no other car in its class has such shoddy construction.
And I’ve tried a lot of them.
KixStart: “I hope this “pimping out” is just a passing fad,…”
Is it profitable? If so…
Profitable? If a dealer can talk a customer into upgraded OEM rims, he can easily DOUBLE his net on the vehicle. The margins on dealer-installed options are insane. The dealers are admittedly a little late to the game (and way overpriced), but I suspect most of the billet-and-chrome clientele are a lot more concerned with “easy monthly payments” than total capital expense ;)
Jerry,
To get the size you ask for in the rear seat, chrysler is stretching the car 6 inches for livery ues.
My beef is not with the size of rear compartment, its with the shape and materials of the seat. I took four people in this car and everyone of us found the seating far inferior to the Camry and Accord. Short, flat cushions and lousy leather coverings.
They would need an upscale model of the 300 at about 38K to do the proper interior.
No they don’t. If Ford can make a decent interior for $18k in a Fusion and 23k in a Five Hundred, there’s no excuse for DCX’s actions.
As for build quality, a new bentley (circ $190K) has a plastic front fascia as do countelss other cars.
I have yet to review a car that had bumpers of such poor construction. It is extremely noteworthy on this car. And I’ve driven a lot of them, most aren’t even tested on this site.
How any of the modern cars will look after say ten years is debateable.
No its not. I frequent junkyards to keep my cars running; I know what 10+ year old Tauruses, Luminas, Maximas, Camrys, etc look like…and I assure you none of them have bumpers and interior components as poor as the Chrysler 300.
I hope you see the general trend about where I am coming from with these comments.
If the car was not a Chrysler, I’d be more interested in replacing my Grand Marquis with one. My brother has a 300C – the Grand Marquis is bigger in the back seat, and the trunk.
If you want bling, get the Chrysler. If you want something that will last 10-15 years with a proven track record of low cost operation and comfort, get a Grand Marquis.
Both of my Grand Marquis I’ve owned had the rear air suspension – load it up with bricks from The Home Depot, and it evens out nicely.
I feel like a voice in the wilderness – even Ford doesn’t advertise the car.
The first test of whether Detroit “gets it” will be the design of the Caddy CTS for the 08 MY and the redesign of the 300 when it takes place. Both were commendable first efforts, but with the next generation of both, the bar has been raised and GM and DCX need to get it right.
WaaaaHoooo,
Sajeev, please remember in what league the 300 plays. They start at 23k list with okay equipment
I never forgot, I assure you. Keep in mind I had a $24,000 Camry LE for a week before testing the Chrysler. Whether or not you agree with my conclusions is another thing, but I’ve had considerable time and access to weigh the pros and cons of this car over a Toyota Camry.
Outside, at least you’ll get noticed and I dare you to lay across and jump on the hood of a Camry or Accord and see if the hood is umblemished.
Press your butt against the front clip of a Camry and it won’t cave under the pressure like a Chrysler 300 did. Ditto the rear end.
Holding cars up to such standards is not The Truth About Cars,
Let’s put it this way: there’s a reason that, even with its new blemishes, the Toyota Camry is King of the World.
There’s also a reason why Chrysler is in the dumps these days.
Sometimes the Truth hurts.
I agree with your review completely…as an Enterprise customer, I’m constantly tossed this vehicle (or a Charger) when I ask for large/premium car, but I always opt for a Camry when available (or a minivan when hauling gear).
Here’s the irony – to me, this car (and the Charger) seems to be assuming larger percentages in rental fleets lately. Yet it makes a poor rental if for only one reason (yes, there are lots) – the poor visibility for the sake of “style” really makes it a bad choice when driving it (as most rentals are) in unknown territory.
The meaning got lost in editing. Sorry about that. The rear end sags if you put a box on the bumper, before dumping it into the trunk. Its a thin, flimsy part just like the front clip. There isn’t a single Chrysler 300 I’ve seen on the road that doesn’t have a rear bumper that jiggles with only a little grab from the top.
Gotcha, fair enough criticism.
Also the Camry I rented also had a gumby-like front clip… It didn’t sag, just flexed easily. New Euro crash standards coming the the US????
jazbo: the edit is on its way to press.
Anywho, every car has a gumby like front clip, but that’s the nature of the beast when you deal with plastics. But man, compared to just about any car from the 1980s on up, the 300’s bumpers are downright flimsy.
I was never a huge cheerleader for the Chrysler LH cars, but they seem better crafted than the LX chassis.
My bad. Bumper copy sorted.
While I’m not a huge fan of the redesign, keep in mind you can get a pretty nice Passat 2.0T for $25k. I can’t stand the styling, but that car is very well screwed together for its price point.
If nothing else, the Passat doesn’t look like a Checker Taxicab. :-)
Sajeev: My mom drives a LH 300M, and the interior quality is much better than the LX. The front seats almost have real lateral support and the rear seats are comfortable across long hauls.
I always thought the 300M was an underrated vehicle. It may not have the dynamic qualities of the LX, but it had far more style than the crude lines and high beltline of the current 300.
ash78: I’d love to have bought that Passat (or the Jetta GLI), but I’m still waiting for VW to prove they’ve got the quality problems licked. Assertions don’t do much to sway me; they need to deliver for a few solid years before I’ll believe, especially when my other choice was an Acura.
Sajeev,
I like the 300 but cannot abide the low quality components and assembly. DCX customer relations are another horror story.
How much do you think it would cost DCX to improve the 300’s quality to Accord and Camry standards?
Brian E: I’m glad I’m not the only person who feels that way. I compared the two back to back in 2005 when the 300 was just coming out and the Concorde was ready to die.
What I don’t get is that, in the near future, Chrysler insists on cutting $1000 in costs from each vehicle it produces…there’s NOTHING left to cut in the product, so I hope they aren’t out of ideas.
Gardiner: If Honda can make an all-around nice car for the same price, I don’t see why Chrysler can’t improve the 300 and not change a thing on the window sticker.
Funny as hell review.
“The 300’s cabin serves-up a farrago of bargain basement materials”
Sajeev, exactly what quantity is a “farrago”?
I object to the small amount of glass. I don’t want to drive a car where I can’t see very well out of it. Also, this is another example of automotive obesity. The styling is a good start. That is, it’s better than most of what’s out there. But that’s not saying all that much. I do think they did a much better styling job on the Magnum. The Magnum is a genuinely good looking car–although I think it would have looked just as good with a reasonable amount of glass.
Both of these are far, far better than the Caliber. The Caliber looks like it was made out of parts from an erector set.
During the 300’s first blush of success many auto pundits were constantly saying to GM and Ford, “Why can’t you be like DCX?” The underlying message was: Catchy styling will save the day!
Sajeev’s review illustrates why styling can only function as a quick fix — it will never save an automaker that doesn’t also get the fundamentals down.
The cruel irony of the 300 is that Chrysler would have ended up making more money — and improving its reputation — if it had focused on quality of design rather than bling.
Nissan has walked a similar path, but at least it has worked harder to repair quality issues and more quickly restyle its products. Duh: If you’re basing your success on being trendy, you can’t sit on your hands. Does DCX understand this?
David: “farrago” is defined as an assortment or collection of things. Maybe Lieberman has a good definition of a Farago for you. :-)
In the Chrysler 300’s case, a farrago is a Whitman’s Sampler of crappy polymers, vinyls, and leathers.
One thing I should add: rear visibility when backing up is pretty bad, but the side-view mirrors are huge enough to make lane change maneuvers pretty stress-free. That surprised me.
Pretty accurate take, I’d say. I had the misfortune to buy one of the first Magnum RTs in June ‘05. The Hemi was outstanding (even if it is not a hemi in the strictest sense) as was the Benz-sourced 5 speed tranny. The helm was tight, if on the light side, and the brakes and road manners were Euro-tuned impeccable. And it was undoubtedly the first unibody Mopar since 1960 with less-than-deafening road rumble, again thanks to the boffins back in Unterturkheim. That said, I sold it in 4 months. Oy! the squeaks and rattles! Shoddy, shoddy, and then some. I can’t believe the Germans let Highland Park get away with such cruddy crap.
The sad part is that the 300 is the best example of DCX putting a half way decent car under bling styling. Other efforts have been more like the PT Cruiser
i think most of the praise heaped on this car’s styling is a case of the emperors clothes. Somebody who was an “authority” said it was daring and bold and from then on no one dared say what an ugly sucker this thing is. these cars deserve to be pimped out.
I can’t believe the Germans let Highland Park get away with such cruddy crap.That said, I sold it in 4 months. Oy! the squeaks and rattles! Shoddy, shoddy, and then some. I can’t believe the Germans let Highland Park get away with such cruddy crap.
Will: I’m sure the Germans feel the same way. I did my best to keep it out of the review, but a relative of mine had a 300C for 9 months before he sold it. You beat him.
Somebody who was an “authority” said it was daring and bold and from then on no one dared say what an ugly sucker this thing is.
Phil: The level of praise for this car during its initial media introduction was stunning. I never “got it” and its been 2 years and nothing changed. Hence my review.
This review just caused me to cringe once again over the fact that the Lucerne isnt RWD with an AWD option. Is it just me or would most of use look at that car in a whole different light with RWD?
socsndaisy: Supposedly the next Lucerne will ride on GM’s Zeta platform. If the Chrysler 300 doesn’t change its ways, its in trouble. Sorry about not adding spizzarkle to the review, but that’s a bit obvious considering the tacky stuff the aftermarket serves up for this car.
I feel like a voice in the wilderness – even Ford doesn’t advertise the car.
Taxman: you feel like that because you are. If the Grand Marquis had a better transmission, bigger wheels and a more widely available handling package it might actually be a contender to the 300’s throne. Which, quite frankly, is kinda shocking for something so old.
ash78:
Yeah most of the Altimas with the ugly grilles come from Crown Pissan next door (almost) to Drennen. They must be having a contest. I’m sure some of the others do it but Drennan and Crown seem to really flaunt it. Then there is Crest Hummer, but what would a Hummer dealer be without a yellow H2 with more crome than paint sitting out in the grass in front?!
Unfortunately my camera phone sux because I’ve seen some great stuff around 205. My favorite is the stock 3-4 year old Chevy Metro (4d, maroon) with the personalized tag “SLOWPOS” with periods hand drawn after the P, O, and S.
There is lots of good stuff downtown though, don’t wear out your phone.
Even tho alot of the 300’s here are pimped with the aftermarket equivilent of an entire 6 piece bedroom set for $199, I can tell u that there are everywhere. So are those dreadfull Calibers, also pimped to within inch of their miserable lives.
But they seem to be all over the place anyway.
A friend of mine just bought a new dark blue Mini convertable. Base car, for 23K.
I am in love. They are NOT all over the place.
does anyone else think that maybe there big[ger] brother had them skimp out on the interior to crap up an other wise sweet ride. its got murrsaydays underparts with a nice unique style, imagine if the interior was at least decent. wouldn’t that notch away at some of there sales?
…just a though