2008 Chrysler 300C

[Oracle of Delphi]

Chrysler 300C gets slight revamping for 2008

Even though we caught this Chrysler going through a fast-food drive-thru, it doesn't appear that this facelift is super-sized. A slightly revamped 300C is expected to roll off the production line in the third quarter of 2007, but it appears that the majority of the update will take place in the rear of the car.

Link: http://info.detnews.com/autosinsider/sneakpeek/index.cfm

[Northstar]

The biggest thing the 300 needs is a better rear end and a better interior. The exterior styling gave it "instant hit" power, but the interior is not good enough to give it staying power, as the sales figures are starting to show. An improved interior would help to keep sales steady until a complete redesign.

[sciguy_0504]

I know it's covered but the rear reminds me of the last-gen Stratus with the third brakelight integrated into the trunk and the horizontal turn signal indicators. Not a good sign, IMO.

[MyerShift]

I know it's covered but the rear reminds me of the last-gen Stratus with the third brakelight integrated into the trunk and the horizontal turn signal indicators. Not a good sign, IMO.

How the hell does this remind you of a Stratus aside from the trunk mounted CHMSL in asny way shape of form? Their styling languages are worlds apart.

The tail lamps are still vertical, the Stratus's were horizontal as well.

[gm4life]

Finally a re-vamp I hope the fix the crony certain consoule. (SP)

[Intrepidation]

I know it's covered but the rear reminds me of the last-gen Stratus with the third brakelight integrated into the trunk and the horizontal turn signal indicators. Not a good sign, IMO.

it's covered

So how can you base those conclusions on a tarp? Plus, a MySHift said, their styling is completely different.

Edited March 21, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Robert Hall]

Maybe a different decklid, taillights, and bumper. Whoopie.

[Sixty8panther]

The rear is what needs it. It's too plain.

[z28luvr01]

[carstar]

:rotflmao: Where did you get that?

[FAPTurbo]

ROFLMAO!

[Chris_Doane]

A turd sells 143,647 units in 2006 and 144,068 units in 2005?

Right.

And before you bring it up, yes, I know the 300 averaged about 24% fleet during those years. In the Intermediate class of fleet sales, Lacrosse averaged about the same, Ford 500 averaged about the same, Impala averaged about 50%, Grand Prix averaged about 63%.

[Intrepidation]

Plus, if it wasn't for the "turd" I doubt the next Impala would be RWD, Zeta might not have been able to have made a business case for itself, and so on.

[z28luvr01]

I never denied the 300's success or its relevance to the Zeta program. That doesn't mean I like the way the car looks.

Lighten up. seriously.

I'll tell you what. When the LaCrosse Super pics come out, feel free to use this:

[Intrepidation]

They are funny though, I'll give you that

I wonder how well it works on a pre-refreshed Durango or an Aztek?

Edited March 23, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Cadillacfan]

I'd hardly consider this a turd. It's very much a revolutionary vehicle that helped restart the large RWD sedan segment in the US and Canada. On top of that, it was pretty hot when it came out. We may see them everywhere and the styling is a bit outdated, but so is the styling of the current CTS and I don't see anyone here calling it a turd. Broaden your horizons people.

[z28luvr01]

Cadillacfan, see my above post. I think the Chrysler 300 is ugly, hence my first post. Being a great seller or revitalizing RWD can't change the fact that I don't find it attractive.

[Chris_Doane]

I never denied the 300's success or its relevance to the Zeta program. That doesn't mean I like the way the car looks.

Lighten up. seriously.

I'll tell you what. When the LaCrosse Super pics come out, feel free to use this:

Seems like you might need to take some of your own advice.

[ocnblu]

The 300 still catches my eye, familiar as it is.

[Robert Hall]

The 300 still catches my eye, familiar as it is.

Yes...even almost 3 years in, it still stands out..I love the proportions--long wheelbase, short tail, low roof..though it's a bit too slab sided.

[Flybrian]

From a sales perspective, it does no better than the Concorde/LHS.

Want to see an LX car that's designed? Look at the Charger. Like it or not, its cohesive and speaks with one vocabulary. The 300 is a mishmash of grotesque wheel arches, gunslit windows, a domineering grille, and a castrated rear. IMO.

[Chris_Doane]

From a sales perspective, it does no better than the Concorde/LHS.

Actually that's not really true at all.

2000

Concorde - 50,206

LHS - 20,982

2001

Concorde - 32,331

LHS - 8,852

2002

Concorde - 31,611

LHS - 552

Even if you throw in the 300M it doesn't get to 140k anually.

2000

300M - 50,682

2001

300M - 36,583

2002

300M - 32,375

[Flybrian]

Well...poop on you.

[Satty]

my penis werked! I made a bay-bay

[Carguy]

The 300 still catches my eye, familiar as it is.

((AMEN!!))---I was looking at one today up close and it looked GOOD!!---But I like the CHARGER more with the CURVE of those finders and shark like nose!

[Sixty8panther]

The 300C will be remembered as huge step in the right direction for American cars.

It's bold, muscular, elegant & unique all while, most importantly: RWD.

[caddycruiser]

I still love everything about the 300, and even more so, the past 2 years of auto shows I have come to the conclusion BOTH times that it was my favorite vehicle on a basis of style, price, comfort, and just "gotta have it". But, that's to me, and I completely understand people thinking otherwise, just as I can't stand other vehicles people love.

To keep it going, it could definitely use smaller updates on the front and rear, not so much to wreck what made it so popular, but just little nips and tucks to keep it fresh--looks like they did just that. And beyond that, not that I've ever thought it was at all bad, but some smaller upgrades to certain interior materials and also to some basic design lines and such (like outside), just to freshen it up, and all is good.

I really don't expect much, and probably not enough that even a lot of people will notice the difference, but that's not all bad. Just refresh what's doing well, and go from there.

[Drew Dowdell]

A turd sells 143,647 units in 2006 and 144,068 units in 2005?

Right.

And before you bring it up, yes, I know the 300 averaged about 24% fleet during those years. In the Intermediate class of fleet sales, Lacrosse averaged about the same, Ford 500 averaged about the same, Impala averaged about 50%, Grand Prix averaged about 63%.

How many of those sales are to parking lots in eastern Michigan?

Edited March 25, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[Drew Dowdell]

The 300 still catches my eye, familiar as it is.

It only catches my eye when someone puts a fake rolls or benz grill on with with the full carriage roof treatment.

[ocnblu]

Much like a CTS would with the same accoutrements. :AH-HA_wink:

[Oracle of Delphi]

Much like a CTS would with the same accoutrements. :AH-HA_wink:

French words are verboten!

[Chris_Doane]

How many of those sales are to parking lots in eastern Michigan?

That would be zero since the sales bank consisted of unsold vehicles.

[Intrepidation]

After having a good look at the interior of a 300C AWD I see little need to improve it (except the addition of MyGig is sweet). It's well made with good materials thoughout the car. The only thing that could use some work is some more options for the rear seat occupants. The materials are very good and soft touch in most places and all of the places you touch often. I'd like a smaller wheel with a thicker rim and better cruise controls but that's it. The back is a little plain so an update should do nicely...the rest of teh car looks great and very classy IMO...although I like the pissed-off Charger better still