BrewSwillis

Yeah....Edmunds. They basically said that the Caravan was better at being a minivan, and that the Oddysey won because it handles more like a car.

I don' think the new exterior is so radical that it's looks would offend anyone. I am sure glad that they are putting the jellybean look to rest.....talk about the 90's. The 90's are epitomized by the jellybean vehicle.

You have no proof or numbers to back any of that up. You just bring up the same old tired lies about Chrysler and other non-GM brands. The proof I have is that out of about 15 Chrysler vehicles that my immediate or extended family have had.......exactly one vehicle had transmission problems. It was my sister's Dodge Stealth......which, you guessed it, is not really a Chrysler vehicle at all, except for the name. The Mitsubishi transmission went bad at about 120K miles. My dad even had a 1986 Dodge Daytona Turbo that he pulled a 16 foot boat with. That car was handed down to me, and I put a bunch of hard miles on it with a Mopar performance computer that raised the boost. No problems but a busted timing belt that was overdue to be changed at 65K miles. Maybe people keep buying Chryslers because they don't actually go through 4 transmissions per vehicle?

Yeah, Chrysler is an "also ran" in the minivan segment. And yeah....the Quest is a beauty queen

That would be an interesting front clip to throw on an American Sebring/Stratus. That could freak some people out. Russia needs to get on that marketing.

Don't forget, it's Union talks season!

Gallery: http://auto.lenta.ru/photo/2007/08/29/siber/06.htm Another article: http://jalopnik.com/cars/moscow-auto-show/...show-294709.php

It's a deceptively worded article. THEY ARE NOT SELLING MOPAR!! Here's what the article really implies: They are not selling the brand "Mopar". They want to sell (outsource) some warehouses and packaging operations......and they also want to outsource transportation like GM and Ford have done. I couldn't believe that Chrysler had kept their own transportation division this long. Why not get independent truckers to bid the lowest on routes to save them a bunch of money and reduce employment (health care)? I personally don't like to see Chrysler employment reduced.....but at least Americans will still be doing the driving.

They want to make us buy the 3.5L top end version. Europeans expect 6 speed autos on lower powered/priced cars, Americans expect to have to pay the most to get the best. Also, alot of Europeans might not buy the 3.5L due to fuel costs.....even though I think the 2.7L and 3.5L MPG are almost the same.

I updated the first post with the full press release.

Article and more images here: http://jalopnik.com/cars/new-cars/2009-dod...sses-293422.php

It probably actually has it......and if not, 280 HP will still probably blow everyone out of the water.

The radio is probably placed low so that it is closer to your MP3 player, that will be in the center console. The NAV screen will probably be at the top of the dash like in the earlier spy pics, and it will probably show some of the radio functions. Chrysler is not completely retarded. It is becoming laughable how you guys react to a pieced together pre-production interior.

Well, considering it's the PT's main competitor (after GM hired the PT's designer, and said make us what the next PT Cruiser would look like so that Chrysler can't make one), I mentioned the HHR. Why would you not compare the interiors of two vehicles that are direct competitors in the retro compact tall wagon segment??....and in that comparison, that magazine said the PT was better, due to it's much nicer interior.

I'm pretty sure the PT replacement will move to the platform that will be shared with the upcoming Dodge Crew....which is a CUV based on the Sebring/Avenger platform. And I think these vehicles are slated to be built in Mexico.

Automobilemag.com seems to disagree with you.....unless you think the HHR's interior is absolutely horrid? :

You mean the PT Cruiser 2.0 SS ??

It's just a paint, wheel, and trim package. At least they kept it under $20K. Not a bad vehicle for someone who wanted a PT anyway, and can get this 1 or 500 edition for a very small price premium. Pics prop of wkjeeps.com

That's actually a pretty big deal. The Woodward Dream Cruise is a huge deal for car enthusiasts, and Duggan's is pretty much the headquarters.

From Allpar.com:

Well, whatever source is actually right....the point I was making is that the new Chrysler 4.7L makes more, or as much power as an older large GM (and probably Dodge and Ford) V8. Which was considered to have plenty of power for their day......but now all of a sudden that power is considered to be inadequate in Chrysler vehicles....even when it matches GM's smaller base V8 (4.8L) in the same size (weight) vehicles.

A current Dakota Quad Cab 4x4 weighs 4552 lbs. A current Siverado Extended Cab 4x4 short box weighs 5265 lbs. A Dodge Ram Quad Cab 4x4 weighs 5273 lbs. The Silverado's 4.8L only has 5 more HP than the Chrysler 4.7L....but has 15 less lb-feet of torque. It appears that Chevy has a weight problem also....or that Chrysler's new 4.7L is right on par with what other manufacturers are offering? But of course when Chrysler has an engine with pretty much the same specs (or better torque in this case) as a GM engine, while pulling the same kind of weight around.....the Chrysler engine is "teh suXxOr!!1!!"

Wow, how did those poor people get around in 1998 with 5.7L Chevy V8's in their trucks that only put out 235 lb-feet of torque? The answer: just fine. Those 1998 Chevy 5.7L engines had almost 100 lb-feet less torque then the current small Chrysler 4.7L, and were probably considered more than adequate for getting Chevy trucks around in 1998.

320 lb-feet of torque is not enough to move a pickup truck or SUV?

Maybe the engineers read forums now, and are messing with people by putting a fake B pillar on the test cars. I hope so!!