2008 Chrysler 300 Refresh

[BrewSwillis]

Pic from wkjeeps.com

The sophisticated interior design of the Chrysler 300 has been enhanced for 2008 with a new instrument panel and center console design, highlighted with satin silver bezels. Soft-touch surfaces on arm rests and door panels, and a newly designed and relocated cruise control stalk, add to the comfortable interior. Available light-emitting diode (LED) lighting in the front cup holders and front- and rear-door map pockets provide additional driver convenience.

The dramatic exterior design of the Chrysler 300 has been refreshed for 2008 with minor changes to the front and rear fascias and tailamps and a new rear deck lid that incorporates an SRT-inspired integrated spoiler and relocated high-mounted stop light.

Summary of new features and changes for the 2008 300 Models:

Simplified Price Class and Package/Options

LX – new name for “base” level car

Front and Rear Fascias and Grille

Bodyside molding

Taillamp design and Decklid

Interior – Instrument panel, cluster, center console, & door trim panel

Adaptive Cruise Control – 300C

Faux wood interior accents – 300 Limited

iPod interface added to UConnect module

LED lighting in front cup holders, front & rear map pockets – 300C

New Speed Control Stalk

Upgraded soft-touch surfaces on Arm rests, Center Console, & Door Trim

Radios including MyGIG HDD radio and Navigation MyGIG

Boston Acoustic eight-speaker 5.1 Matrix Surround Sound amplifier w/ subwoofer

Rear Seat Video Entertainment includes Sirius Backseat TV

Remote Start

5.7-liter Hemi 300C Fuel Saver Mode display

Power adjustable pedals -std on 300 Limited

Side-curtain & seat-mounted side airbags – std 300 LX Great American Package

Tire pressure monitor warning lamp – std on 300 LX

Interior Colors

Dark Khaki/Lt. Graystone

Dark Slate Gray

Exterior Colors

Clearwater Blue Pearl Coat

Dark Titanium Metallic Clear Coat

Light Sandstone Metallic Clear Coat Clear

Wheels

17 in. Machine face aluminum wheels – Chrysler 300 Touring

17 in. Wheel Covers - 300 LX

Luxury Group – 300 Limited

Sunroof

Boston Acoustics six speaker, 276 watt DSP amp speaker system

AM/FM/CD/DVD/HDD/MP3 MyGIG radio

California Walnut wood accent on steering wheel, door pulls, and interior trim

Remote Start

LED-illuminated front cup holders and front and rear door-map pockets

SmartBeam headlamp control system

Rain-sensitive windshield wipers

Luxury Equipment Group – 300C

Adaptive Cruise Control

Supplemental turn signals and puddle lamp mirrors

Heated Rear Seats

California Walnut wood accent on steering wheel, door pulls, and interior trim

Introductory Base MSRP pricing:

LX - $24,495 + $675 destination

Touring - $28,590 + $675 destination

Limited - $31,620 + $675 destination

300C - $35,395 + $675 destination

300C SRT8 - $41,385 + $675 destination + $2100 GG tax = $44,160

Touring AWD - $31,445 + $675 destination

Limited AWD - $33,815 + $675 destination

300C AWD - $37,495 + $675 destination

Source: http://www.wkjeeps.com/

[CMG]

Doesn't look much different to me, the third brake light in the trunklid, the interior is more plush. Is that the LY platform, or still the LX?

I have seen the new Magnum (2008 I think?) and it looks VERY much nicer this time around IMO. I like it.

[CMG]

Hahaha

OK, now I get some text. LOL!

Thanks for the link!

[Paolino]

Wow. Nothing exciting. I would have at least hoped they'd get rid of the 190hp 2.7L V6 as a base engine.

[NOS2006]

Dude, it's got LED cup holders and a Hemi!

[Intrepidation]

They should really dump the 2.7L from all 3 cars but the 300 if nothing else. I also don't get the "new faux wood" ...isn't the current model available with real wood?

[VenSeattle]

They should really dump the 2.7L from all 3 cars but the 300 if nothing else. I also don't get the "new faux wood" ...isn't the current model available with real wood?

Real wood is only available in an optional "wood package" just like on the previous 300M & LHS. It looks like the 300 Limited will come with faux wood standard.

[Intrepidation]

Real wood is only available in an optional "wood package" just like on the previous 300M & LHS. It looks like the 300 Limited will come with faux wood standard.

Oh, I see.

[FAPTurbo]

The interior was already pretty good, but it never hurts to see some improvements.

Edited July 26, 2007 by Captainbooyah

[CMG]

Wow. Nothing exciting. I would have at least hoped they'd get rid of the 190hp 2.7L V6 as a base engine.

True, but the 2.7 base engine still puts out more power than say.... a 1992 Buick Century's anemic but bigger 3.3 V6...?

:AH-HA_wink:

j/k

Not many people look for the 2.7 base engine, they seem to gravitate towards the rental companies...

[Cory Wolfe]

I was hoping for more. The rear fascia is still as uninteresting and blocky as ever. The interior changes sound good, however.

[AxelTheRed]

Putting that 2.7 in those big ass cars never made much sense to me.

[Intrepidation]

Putting that 2.7 in those big ass cars never made much sense to me.

What makes less sense is that it makes less power in the LX cars than the LH cars.

[CMG]

What makes less sense is that it makes less power in the LX cars than the LH cars.

Maybe it's exhaust manifolds for the chassis differences, or? The A body Barracuda 383 Magnums were down in power from the same year 383 Magnums in B bodies because of the exhaust manifolds needed to get them to fit. Could be the same scenario? Not really sure...

[Intrepidation]

Besides new lenses out back, I don't see any differences. The interior is a little more evident...the center stack no longer flows into the center console...a trait that's been happing a lot in cars lately...it has the new corporate stereo, The center console is noticeably different with a new armrest design, cupholders and shifter area...the silver trim looks nice and better IMO than the chrome stuff. Door panels are new as well, and so are the vents. If the materials are upgraded it should be pretty sweet...the current materials are pretty good anyway.

[CMG]

The seats seem to be more like the SRT (or R/T with road and track package) with the side support- I've only driven an SRT8 so I'm not the world's most familiar with the 300C. I wonder why the exposed cupholders instead of the current covered cupholders, must be a reason?

[Intrepidation]

The seats seem to be more like the SRT (or R/T with road and track package) with the side support- I've only driven an SRT8 so I'm not the world's most familiar with the 300C. I wonder why the exposed cupholders instead of the current covered cupholders, must be a reason?

Well it's another trend the market has been gravitating towards. In the `90's hideaway cupholders were all teh rage, but most cars these days have exposed cupholders, but they are trimmed in "metal" of some type to make them look upmarket.

The console itself looks to be higher off the floor than the old one, as the arm rest isn't nearly as high off the console as it is in the old one...although the actual hight of the armrest looks unchanged.

[Delta Force79]

The door panels and dash look the same to me, I was hoping for something more than this...the tailights and trunk lid are obviously different....but nothing drastic....I'm curious to see the front.

[Drew Dowdell]

They didn't fix the ergonomics issue, so this car is still dead to me.

[CMG]

They didn't fix the ergonomics issue, so this car is still dead to me.

WHAT "ergonomics issue"?

Keep in mind I've driven one, and driven many LX cars.

[Sixty8panther]

Wow, if I squint REEEEEEAL hard and drink a six pack I can ALMOST see a differance.

Amazing what passses for a "refresh" these days.

[Robert Hall]

Very subtle changes..I wonder what the front fascia change looks like.. Not sure if I like the 3rd brakelight in the decklid...having it in the rear shelf is cleaner looking, IMHO.

[Robert Hall]

WHAT "ergonomics issue"?

Keep in mind I've driven one, and driven many LX cars.

I've driven and ridden in a few...the only issue I've noticed is that the thick pillars + small side and rear windows (esp. on the Magnum) leads to poor outward visibility..

[BrewSwillis]

Putting that 2.7 in those big ass cars never made much sense to me.

What makes less sense is that it makes less power in the LX cars than the LH cars.

The engine was retuned for lower and midrange torque. The LX cars are heavier than the LH cars they replaced. This engine is pretty close to the base engine in the Buick Lucerne.

All of Chrysler's V6 engines will be replaced by the Phoenix series of V6 engines in the not so distant future.

[Drew Dowdell]

WHAT "ergonomics issue"?

Keep in mind I've driven one, and driven many LX cars.

Poor outward visibility.

Poor control placement, particularly the cruise control and steering wheel controls <the ones on the back of the wheel>

the fact that I feel like I'm driving a bathtub

the fact that this is a fairly upright car, yet it's dash surface area is nearly as large as a dustbuster van. <ever try to wipe off a window smudge while on the highway?>

[regfootball]

Poor outward visibility.

Poor control placement, particularly the cruise control and steering wheel controls <the ones on the back of the wheel>

the fact that I feel like I'm driving a bathtub

the fact that this is a fairly upright car, yet it's dash surface area is nearly as large as a dustbuster van. <ever try to wipe off a window smudge while on the highway?>

^^

[aaaantoine]

Adaptive Cruise Control...

[BrewSwillis]

Poor outward visibility.

Poor control placement, particularly the cruise control and steering wheel controls <the ones on the back of the wheel>

the fact that I feel like I'm driving a bathtub

the fact that this is a fairly upright car, yet it's dash surface area is nearly as large as a dustbuster van. <ever try to wipe off a window smudge while on the highway?>

The cruise control stalk was redesigned/relocated. It only takes a few days to get used to the smaller greenhouse. I actually can't stand cars with larger greenhouses anymore because I hate the sun in my eyes, and it heating up the car in the summer. My 300 Touring stays nice and cool with the small greenhouse and 35% tint on all of the windows.

[CMG]

Poor outward visibility.

Poor control placement, particularly the cruise control and steering wheel controls <the ones on the back of the wheel>

the fact that I feel like I'm driving a bathtub

the fact that this is a fairly upright car, yet it's dash surface area is nearly as large as a dustbuster van. <ever try to wipe off a window smudge while on the highway?>

Well lemme take these one by one.

Poor outward visibility? How so, are you VERY short, or VERY tall? I found no troubles seeing out, despite having heard the "it's got a chopped roof" blindspot rumors.... Where do you ACTUALLY have trouble seeing? I'm assuming you've driven one....

"Poor control placement"? I find the controls AWESOME. No troubles whatsoever. Maybe you PREFER a different layout, but it ain't rocket science, and everything seems VERY well laid out. If you have issues with the steering wheel controls being "on the back of the wheel" then I suggest you get off the dash and sit in the front seat. LOL That's the side the steering wheel controls are on...?

The cruise control is VERY easy to use, I was an "old school" guy and couldn't figure it out at first, once I read the manual I have nothing but praise. It's awesome.

You "feel like you are driving a bathtub"? LOL Is that an "ergonomics issue", or a "personal issue"...? Hmmmm I suggest you stay away from late model Impala SSs and Caprice SSs.

Dash surface "nearly as large as a dustbuster van"? I don't find it terribly large, and with a sloped windshield I have no idea what you think is better? Maybe an early Volkswagon Beetle with an upright windshield is more your speed?

How about a Corvette's dash, or a late model Camaro/Firebird? Ever driven one? You must HATE their "ergonomics", they have laid back windshields and large dash surfaces...

I'll give you a couple Magnum "issues" so it looks better (more realistic) for the next complaints....

Rear window-gets dirty, the design of the car was almost MADE to get the rear window dirty.

Slight rotor shimmy at very high speeds under hard braking on the non-SRT cars. Pound the brake pedal at 100+mph and you'll think the rotors are slightly warped, next panic stop from highway speeds (60mph) will produce nothing. Odd.

Factory stock Continental tires aren't the world's greatest, most R/T owners love the difference when they swap out the tires for other brands.

There!

You OWE me!!!!!!!!

hahaha

[CMG]

^^

You need to get off the dash and into the driver's seat too. The steering wheel controls are on the FACE of the steering wheel.

LOL

Anyways, for the others...

*ahem*

^^

(Hey- BrewSwillis- how'd I do on the REAL concerns? Have you ever had a high speed "panic stop" and felt the rotors pulsate slightly?)

Here's a photo for the doubters- the steering wheel controls are EASY to use. And on the FACE of the wheel....

Check out the "HUUGGGGEEE" space the top of the dash has too. LOL

Edited July 26, 2007 by CMG

[Intrepidation]

Well lemme take these one by one.

Poor outward visibility? How so, are you VERY short, or VERY tall? I found no troubles seeing out, despite having heard the "it's got a chopped roof" blindspot rumors.... Where do you ACTUALLY have trouble seeing? I'm assuming you've driven one....

"Poor control placement"? I find the controls AWESOME. No troubles whatsoever. Maybe you PREFER a different layout, but it ain't rocket science, and everything seems VERY well laid out. If you have issues with the steering wheel controls being "on the back of the wheel" then I suggest you get off the dash and sit in the front seat. LOL That's the side the steering wheel controls are on...?

The cruise control is VERY easy to use, I was an "old school" guy and couldn't figure it out at first, once I read the manual I have nothing but praise. It's awesome.

You "feel like you are driving a bathtub"? LOL Is that an "ergonomics issue", or a "personal issue"...? Hmmmm I suggest you stay away from late model Impala SSs and Caprice SSs.

Dash surface "nearly as large as a dustbuster van"? I don't find it terribly large, and with a sloped windshield I have no idea what you think is better? Maybe an early Volkswagon Beetle with an upright windshield is more your speed?

How about a Corvette's dash, or a late model Camaro/Firebird? Ever driven one? You must HATE their "ergonomics", they have laid back windshields and large dash surfaces...

I'll give you a couple Magnum "issues" so it looks better (more realistic) for the next complaints....

Rear window-gets dirty, the design of the car was almost MADE to get the rear window dirty.

Slight rotor shimmy at very high speeds under hard braking on the non-SRT cars. Pound the brake pedal at 100+mph and you'll think the rotors are slightly warped, next panic stop from highway speeds (60mph) will produce nothing. Odd.

Factory stock Continental tires aren't the world's greatest, most R/T owners love the difference when they swap out the tires for other brands.

There!

You OWE me!!!!!!!!

hahaha

Nice to see another person who doesn't pointlessly bash Chrysler because it's a Chrysler.

The controls are all laid out very well and are easy to reach...my only issues with the ergonimcs of the car are:

The cruise control stalk...it's located in an awkward position...I prefer it mounted on teh steering wheel like the LH models...but that's been adressed so no worries. The other thing was that the wheel seemed really big and kinda skinny...I could live with it but I just happen to like smaller and thicker wheels.

The dash is not for humping, sleeping or sitting in folks...please keep that in mind while driving

[BrewSwillis]

(Hey- BrewSwillis- how'd I do on the REAL concerns? Have you ever had a high speed "panic stop" and felt the rotors pulsate slightly?)

I've never had any problems with the 300's rotors.

However, I can't say the same for my previous 2002 Monte Carlo SS. That car had bad rotor pulsating that the dealer insisted on machining before they replaced them under warranty. So I told them "see you in a month or two"....and sure enough, the rotor pulsating was back, and then the dealer replaced the rotors under warranty.

I quickly got used to the cruise control on the 300, but I think I preferred the location on the Monte better, which was on the steering wheel.

[ocnblu]

Subtle changes, yes, but then the 300 was a knockout from the start, a real sweetheart, especially in retail trims.

[LosAngeles]

All of Chrysler's V6 engines will be replaced by the Phoenix series of V6 engines in the not so distant future.

What Allpar had to say about them:

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/phoenix-engines.html

Definitely interested in the camless design.

[CMG]

Nice to see another person who doesn't pointlessly bash Chrysler because it's a Chrysler.

"Pointlessly bashing" is usually a personal issue, not a VEHICLE issue... IMO anyways.

I don't care what people say, usually there is an agenda behind the constant bashing. Those who bash other brands to feel better about their own brand, that kind of thing.

There isn't a brand made I can't ACCURATELY bash, as well as accurately praise. They ALL have their good and bad, IMO. The blind either see all good, or all bad, for personal reasons.

[CMG]

What Allpar had to say about them:

http://www.allpar.com/mopar/phoenix-engines.html

Definitely interested in the camless design.

Thanks for the link. Never seen it!

[Robert Hall]

The seats seem to be more like the SRT (or R/T with road and track package) with the side support- I've only driven an SRT8 so I'm not the world's most familiar with the 300C. I wonder why the exposed cupholders instead of the current covered cupholders, must be a reason?

More practical... covered cupholders aren't as useful as open ones...(i.e. it's hard to open a covered/retractable one and insert a beverage container w/ one hand in one motion..)

[sciguy_0504]

I like the refreshed rear facia, especially the "spoiler." It adds a little flair. However, is appears as if the center stack hasn't changed much and those nasty HVAC/radio controls are still there along with the ugly faux aluminum.

[CMG]

I like the refreshed rear facia, especially the "spoiler." It adds a little flair. However, is appears as if the center stack hasn't changed much and those nasty HVAC/radio controls are still there along with the ugly faux aluminum.

What is "nasty" about the dual climate control knobs?

One knob for placement of airflow, one knob for temperature. One set for each side. Nasty? LOL What would you do DIFFERENT?>?!?!

The radio controls are not only as simple as they get, they are the same basic layout as any other two knob car stereo. Again- what would you have done DIFFERENT?

The steering wheel also has radio controls. I assume they are probably "nasty" too?

:AH-HA_wink:

LOL

[Intrepidation]

I like the refreshed rear facia, especially the "spoiler." It adds a little flair. However, is appears as if the center stack hasn't changed much and those nasty HVAC/radio controls are still there along with the ugly faux aluminum.

What is "nasty" about the dual climate control knobs?

One knob for placement of airflow, one knob for temperature. One set for each side. Nasty? LOL What would you do DIFFERENT?>?!?!

The radio controls are not only as simple as they get, they are the same basic layout as any other two knob car stereo. Again- what would you have done DIFFERENT?

The steering wheel also has radio controls. I assume they are probably "nasty" too?

:AH-HA_wink:

LOL

I never had a problem with them, but Chrysler's newer HVAC controls are integrated and a nicer design...plus they have a nice tactile feel and rubberized grip.

I'd also like to know how the faux aluminum is "ugly" Would you prefer it covered in faux wood, or black plastic? Real metal would be nice, but it doesn't look or feel bad...and it's no worse than the faux metal you find in, say, the Avalon's interior.

I do wonder why the steering wheel controls aren't silver anymore...I liked them that way...but it's not the end of the world either.

Edited July 28, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Paolino]

True, but the 2.7 base engine still puts out more power than say.... a 1992 Buick Century's anemic but bigger 3.3 V6...?

:AH-HA_wink:

j/k

That's not even a good joke when comparing it to a car 16 YEARS OLDER :AH-HA_wink:

[CMG]

That's not even a good joke when comparing it to a car 16 YEARS OLDER :AH-HA_wink:

16 years doesn't mean much with EFI internal combustion engines. A 2.7 V6 that trounces a 3.3 V6 in power is nothing to sneeze at!

I think the Dodge Caravan 3.3 that came out over a decade ago had way more power than the Buick's anemic 3.3, didn't it?

j/k

(sort of)

[Intrepidation]

I wonder if all of the design flaws of the 2.7L when it was introduced in the LH series were resolved or if it's still got all of the defects?

[daves87rs]

*YAWN*

I thought they would do more...

Better engines would help this thing quite a bit...what good does a nicer interior if it doesn't go any faster?

[CMG]

I wonder if all of the design flaws of the 2.7L when it was introduced in the LH series were resolved or if it's still got all of the defects?

I don't know anything about the 2.7 to be honest, never even driven one. I've driven many 3.5 LX cars, they are actually decent power. I heard the cop car versions of the Dodge Charger with the 3.5 V6 could out accelerate the V8 Crown Vic cop cars it was being compared to. Sounds odd to me!

What design flaws did the 2.7 have? Aside from dismal performance, of course....

:AH-HA_wink:

[Intrepidation]

*YAWN*

I thought they would do more...

Better engines would help this thing quite a bit...what good does a nicer interior if it doesn't go any faster?

The only "bad" engine is the 2.7L...the 3.5L makes 250 hp, 5.7L makes 340, and 6.1L makes 425...

[Flybrian]

Another instance of Chrysler's divisions being poorly-defined. This is where a Plymouth brand comes in hand, offering a bottom-barrel 2.7l Fury and a 3.5l Gran Fury. Chrysler gets the 3.5l standard out of the gate; Ditto with Dodge.

[CMG]

*YAWN*

I thought they would do more...

Better engines would help this thing quite a bit...what good does a nicer interior if it doesn't go any faster?

SRT8.

Bad gas mileage.

VERY fast.

Lotsa money compared to a base car most likely destined for rentals, taxis, etc.

R/T is an honest very low 14 second car, it can get close to 30mph putting on the highway.

SXT is a 3.5 V6, not bad power at all, but not much better gas mileage than an MDS equipped 5.7 Hemi, and I'm not even sure it gets a better rating, truth be told. Somebody once said the R/T was rated at the same city mpg as the 3.5 V6, but the Hemi was rated 1 mpg better on the highway. You'll have to check, as I am not positive, but that's what I hear.

[CMG]

The only "bad" engine is the 2.7L...the 3.5L makes 250 hp, 5.7L makes 340, and 6.1L makes 425...

5.7 in the R/T with the "Road and Track" package gets a 350hp rating now, I think the suitcase has been designed for better flow, as well as additional noise....

[Intrepidation]

Another instance of Chrysler's divisions being poorly-defined. This is where a Plymouth brand comes in hand, offering a bottom-barrel 2.7l Fury and a 3.5l Gran Fury. Chrysler gets the 3.5l standard out of the gate; Ditto with Dodge.

Can't argue with that...but IMO Plymouth should have a FWD large car to give buyers an alternative who don't want/car if it's FWD or RWD.