Best looking Chryslers?

"Lloyd" > wrote in message
...
> What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965? (OK, I
> picked that date since I was 15 that year and started paying attention
> to cars.)
>
You didn't say production car, so all-time favorite (or at least in the top
5) ....Chrysler Chronos. And since I was born in '63, the first time I saw
that black and gold Plymouth Arrow...it was love.

'Best Looking', like 'Most Favorite Song' has certainly changed for me over
the years. From the Arrow to the Chronos, with a 'little red express' truck
thrown in.

Mark in Harrisburg.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Lloyd wrote:

> What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965?

This is, bar none, the best Chrysler vehicle that was never made:

http://media.popularmechanics.com/im...1097_18_lg.jpg

http://tinyurl.com/6fstm2

Look at each of the pics on this page and drool:

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z...00_Hemi_C.aspx

A V-8, RWD, LH-based 300 that was ready to go into production and
probably be at your dealer in the fall of 2003.

But it was too classy for Chrysler, who was given orders by their German
masters to kill the car lest it compete with some Mercedes models.
Instead the abortion known as the LX platform was born.

On Aug 10, 7:39 pm, MoPar Man > wrote:
> Lloyd wrote:
> > What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965?
>
> This is, bar none, the best Chrysler vehicle that was never made:
>
> http://media.popularmechanics.com/im...1097_18_lg.jpg
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6fstm2
>
> Look at each of the pics on this page and drool:
>
> http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z...00_Hemi_C.aspx
>
> A V-8, RWD, LH-based 300 that was ready to go into production and
> probably be at your dealer in the fall of 2003.
>
> But it was too classy for Chrysler, who was given orders by their German
> masters to kill the car lest it compete with some Mercedes models.
> Instead the abortion known as the LX platform was born.

Surely you know all makers produce heaps of concept cars, most of
which never get into production. Recently, Chrysler Firepower, ME12,
Chronos, and all the turbine cars come to mind.

Chrysler had no rwd drivetrains suitable for a passenger car in 2003.
The only ones were truck ones. Further, every maker was starting to
copy cab forward, meaning the Chryslers were becoming less distinctive
and not standing out.

Further, I assure you, nobody cross shops Chrysler and Mercedes, any
more than they would a Ford Taurus and a Jaguar.

Lloyd wrote:

> Surely you know all makers produce heaps of concept cars, most of
> which never get into production. Recently, Chrysler Firepower,
> ME12, Chronos, and all the turbine cars come to mind.

The Hemi-C concept shown during the 2000 auto show circuit was
practically production ready. It wasn't one of those crazy, blue-sky
concepts like the ones you just mentioned. Look at how similar it was
to the 300m.

Remember that the 300m "concept" was shown just 2 or 3 years earlier
(January 1998 Detroit auto show if I'm not mistaken) and it went into
production with minimal or no modifications.

> Chrysler had no rwd drivetrains suitable for a passenger car in 2003.

Sure they did. They had the 5.2 liter V8. They were already building
the RWD Viper for how long?

> The only ones were truck ones.

So? What are you saying - that just because they were putting the 5.2L
in the truck, that they couldn't also put it in the Hemi-C ?

> Further, every maker was starting to copy cab forward, meaning
> the Chryslers were becoming less distinctive and not standing out.

That's a lot of bull****.

It was the interference from Daimler that had Chrysler scrap the LH line
and delay the introduction of a completely new vehicle line for 2 years
- a time when Dodge / Chrysler dealers were really hurting for sales.

> Further, I assure you, nobody cross shops Chrysler and Mercedes,

That 300N hemi-C concept was classy enough to break through the glass
ceiling and threaten Mercedes sales in North America. After all,
Chrysler now had the "prestige" of being essentially a sister-brand to
Mercedes.

You haven't said what you think of the car.

Lloyd wrote:

>> GM- I don't really care, although I wouldn't throw an early 70s Firebird
>> 455 SD out of the garage, nor a Buick GSX.
>
> See, I think the Firebirds were overdone -- too many spoilers and
> scoops (although I must admit, in 1970, the Firebird Trans Am was a
> shocking vehicle in its styling and its audacity). But for the most
> part, I think GM did a better job on the B bodies in the 60s-early 70s
> than the F bodies.

Which is why I said a Firebird, and not a T/A. The bandit can have his
screaming chicken on the hood, give me Rockford's gold Firebird. A
pre-75 model. Round headlamps.

Even that one was a bit overblown, but in a kitchy kind of way that
wasn't as over the top as, say, a godawful 78 Z/28 Camaro.

MoPar Man wrote:
> Lloyd wrote:
>
>> What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965?
>
> This is, bar none, the best Chrysler vehicle that was never made:
>
> http://media.popularmechanics.com/im...1097_18_lg.jpg
>

Sorry, no sale. It is to a garden-variety Concorde as the "new" GTO was
to a Grand Prix. That is to say, WAY too damn close. Nothing distinguishing.

Again, nothing after '75 even comes CLOSE to making my all-time list anyway.

On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Lloyd wrote:

> What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965?

Entire Chrysler-brand line as well as Imperial for '65
'65 Barracuda
'66-'67 Charger
'67 and '69 Valiant
'67-'69 Barracuda
'70-'72 Dart

Steve > writes:
>
> Again, nothing after '75 even comes CLOSE to making my all-time list anyway.

I suppose I need to get off my chest that I actually like the
first-generation Cordoba, the last few years of C-bodies, and the
R-body New Yorker.

"Again, nothing after '75 even comes CLOSE to making my all-time list
anyway."


Ditto. for me it was after 72.




"Steve" > wrote in message
...
> MoPar Man wrote:
>> Lloyd wrote:
>>
>>> What do you think are the best looking Chryslers since 1965?
>>
>> This is, bar none, the best Chrysler vehicle that was never made:
>>
>> http://media.popularmechanics.com/im...1097_18_lg.jpg
>>
>
> Sorry, no sale. It is to a garden-variety Concorde as the "new" GTO was to
> a Grand Prix. That is to say, WAY too damn close. Nothing distinguishing.
>
> Again, nothing after '75 even comes CLOSE to making my all-time list
> anyway.

On Aug 11, 5:40 pm, MoPar Man > wrote:
> Lloyd wrote:
> > Surely you know all makers produce heaps of concept cars, most of
> > which never get into production. Recently, Chrysler Firepower,
> > ME12, Chronos, and all the turbine cars come to mind.
>
> The Hemi-C concept shown during the 2000 auto show circuit was
> practically production ready. It wasn't one of those crazy, blue-sky
> concepts like the ones you just mentioned. Look at how similar it was
> to the 300m.
>
> Remember that the 300m "concept" was shown just 2 or 3 years earlier
> (January 1998 Detroit auto show if I'm not mistaken) and it went into
> production with minimal or no modifications.
>
> > Chrysler had no rwd drivetrains suitable for a passenger car in 2003.
>
> Sure they did. They had the 5.2 liter V8.

OK, if you want to talk dinosaurs.


>They were already building
> the RWD Viper for how long?
>

Viper drivetrain is way too expensive for a $20k-$30 passenger car.
Plus no automatic.

> > The only ones were truck ones.
>
> So? What are you saying - that just because they were putting the 5.2L
> in the truck, that they couldn't also put it in the Hemi-C ?

And the rear suspension? Transmission? Oh, and how about a smooth,
quiet, fuel-efficient engine? Where is that 5.2 L engine now? And
what did it put out? Around 200 hp, wasn't it? In a V8? Heck, some
4s beat that.

>
> > Further, every maker was starting to copy cab forward, meaning
> > the Chryslers were becoming less distinctive and not standing out.
>
> That's a lot of bull****.
>
> It was the interference from Daimler that had Chrysler scrap the LH line
> and delay the introduction of a completely new vehicle line for 2 years
> - a time when Dodge / Chrysler dealers were really hurting for sales.
>
> > Further, I assure you, nobody cross shops Chrysler and Mercedes,
>
> That 300N hemi-C concept was classy enough to break through the glass
> ceiling and threaten Mercedes sales in North America. After all,
> Chrysler now had the "prestige" of being essentially a sister-brand to
> Mercedes.

So was Jaguar to Ford.

>
> You haven't said what you think of the car.

I never liked the 300M styling. The Intrepid, Concorde, LHS, and
Vision were all good looking, but the 300M had about 5 different
shaped openings in the front (headlights, grille, fog lights, lower
grille), none of which blended with any of the others. Plus the deck
was too short and the grille too little.