By on March 17, 2021

Today’s Rare Ride was commonplace a couple of decades ago, but it’s one of those cars by and large ruined via neglectful owners, inattentive build quality from the factory, and BHPH lots.

Come along as we learn about the most luxurious Chrysler LH sedan of the Nineties.

(Read More…)

By on August 21, 2020

It’s unofficially been Chrysler Time around the Rare Rides pages lately, and another Chrysler product follows up the New Yorker and Conquest. It was much more important product than either of those two, however, and it signified the end of one of Chrysler’s divisions.

Picture it: 1995, Eagle Vision.

(Read More…)

By on October 13, 2017

2004 Chrysler 300m Interior, Image: Chrysler

TTAC Commentator mopar4wd writes:

Sajeev,

So, I’ve noticed over the years that common wisdom for purchasing budget cars is all about condition and less about mileage. But other than my trusty ’88 Ramcharger, ’00 Durango, ’91 Eagle summit (Mitsubishi Mirage) and ’87 Toyota pickup, most of the vehicles I have owned all started becoming awful to own going somewhere between 150-200k miles. The list includes Fords, Subarus, Jeeps, Nissans, Chryslers, Volkswagens, Volvos, etc., since I pretty much only buy sub-$5,000 cars and have to rely on them daily. I have shifted to a little older and lower mileage (and of course well taken care of). Usually between 90-120k miles and 10 to 12 years old.

Which leads me to my question. I’m now the owner of a 2004 Chrysler 300M with 42,000 miles. The owner bought it from a Chrysler dealer locally in 2006. It’s well maintained and clean despite living its life outdoors: new tires, new battery and oil changes every 3k miles. The owner had it up for a reasonable price but everyone was low balling her — I brought a reasonable offer (about 15 percent less than asking) and picked it up.

After driving it a thousand miles a few things have popped up: cam sensor going out (a common issue that I’m DIYing today), I’ve made an appointment to have the timing belt and water pump replaced (there was no record of this work), and based on feel I think the rear struts may need a change.

Given the like-new condition of the car is there anything else I should be looking at doing (fluid changes are on the list) given that it’s closing in on 14 years old? (Read More…)

By on February 13, 2015

08 - 2000 Dodge Intrepid RT Down On the Junkyard - Picture courtesy of Murilee MartinWith the ’01 Saturn L200 yesterday and the ’01 Pontiac Aztek the day before that, we’re having a 21st Century Junkyard Find week. I’ll continue that with today’s find: Dodge’s high-performance version of the second-gen Dodge Intrepid: The Intrepid R/T. (Read More…)

By on October 2, 2012

A broken clock is always right twice a day. But how about the last generation of Intrepids?

(Read More…)

By on February 17, 2010

These are not the kind of cars that normally get me to pull over and shoot, but something about them called to me. I came up with three reasons to justify their occupying memory space in my camera. One: their sloping roofs, clean noses and high tails suggest excellent aerodynamics. Sure enough, with a Cd of .33 for the Monte Carlo and a .30 for the Intrepid, they’re definitely on the slippery side of average.  (Read More…)

Recent Comments

  • Inside Looking Out: Design is a one reason why I will not buy any Honda any time soon.
  • ToolGuy: I read this as Timberland and I got excited and then I thought maybe Justin Timberlake and I got *really*...
  • Inside Looking Out: Like Ford did with Mazda. Not that I compare Mazda with DB. Hell, why not. Mazda is also premium...
  • Inside Looking Out: No V6? Then how many miles it goes fully charged?
  • 2ACL: @FreedMike #ReasonsSheIsMyEx – Good call. I don’t expect a woman to be mechanical guru, but when...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber