This argument kills me. Why do people keep quoting MSRP on Chevy cars. Any monkey can go a GM dealer and get $5000 off most any car...do that with a 300. Also I have a feeling alot of people who would normally buy say....a Malibu, are trading up to Impala's once they get in the dealer due to the rebates.....This makes me wonder how many Impala shoppers would actually cross shop the 300.

 

This is a pretty good point. MSRP really doesn't mean much; it's what the vehicle is actually selling for.

Edmunds True Market Value Pricing:

Base Models, typical options
Chevy Impala, 3.4L V6 180hp/205ft-lbs, $19024
Chrysler 300, 2.7L V6 190hp/190ft-lbs, $24370 (+$5346)

Mid-level Models, typical options
Chevy Impala LS, 3.8L V6 200hp/225ft-lbs, $22651
Chrysler 300 Touring, 3.5L V6 250hp/250ft-lbs, $28290 (+$5639)

Upper-level Models, typical options
Chevy Impala SS, S/C 3.8L V6 240hp/280ft-lbs, $24525
Chrysler 300 Limited, 3.5L V6 250hp/250ft-lbs, $30785 (+$6260)
Chrysler 300 C, 5.7L V8 340hp/390ft-lbs, $34730 (+$10205)

Sure, the 300 is creating a lot of buzz right now, but if it's "sporty," affordable family transportation you're looking for, Impala is giving you a better value. Plus, how much of this hype is valid beyond the C model? That's clearly not the Impala's territory.

And if you'd consider a wagon (with hopes of evening out pricing), you're looking at a similar comparison ($24365 Magnumn SE up to $33075 Magnum RT).

 

That is one reason why I don't like GMs jewler style pricing.... aka price the MSRP high then give huge discounts to make people feel like they are getting a huge deal.

I know a lot of people that see a $38K Avalance MSRP and are scared away before they even do the research and see that it would really cost them only $31K to buy it.

 

The question really is not which is the cheapest, it's which is the best value.

MSRP of Impala SS and 300C are roughly comparable. It's possible to get discounts of 5 or 6 thousand dollars on Impala SS...but only very modest discounts on the 300C.

So which is the better value?

Impala rides on a competent..but dated FWD platform. It has a decent, but not awe-inspiring powertrain. It's interior is your basic GM generica.

The 300C rides on an all new...Mercedes E-class inspired RWD chassis. It is powered by a magnificent powertrain. It has huge brakes and 18" wheels. It has a very nice, upscale interior. And love it or hate it---it's sheetmetal makes a bold statement.


Considering all this......if I had to spend an extra 7 or 8K on a 300C.....the 300C is the overwhelmingly better value...in my eyes.

 

Comparing an Impala SS (new) to a 300C would be like comparing an old Grad Prix GTP to the 94-96 Impala SS. There is no comparision. I would much rather have a four door rwd platform with a V-8 than a fwd supercharged V-6. I will gladly pay the additional money for the 300C.

 

If what amounts to a $10,000 price gap (33% of price!) is surmountable, then you are likely not shopping for an Impala (SS or otherwise) to begin with. You are more likely to be shopping against Inifiniti G35, Cadillac CTS, and BMW 3/5 Series. That makes for a far less lucid verdict and estimation of value.

 

While we're on the subject, did anyone notice in that R&T article (that was posted here) that the 250 hp 3.5L 300 took 8.0 seconds to hit 60 mph? Just about the same time as a 200 hp N/A 3800 Impala/GP/etc. The 240 hp/ 260 hp supercharged 3800 cars are in the mid/upper six second range, which of course can't keep up with the Hemi, but easily trounces the 3.5 (just like I knew it would), for similar price and fuel economy.

Again, people aren't likely to be cross shopping an Impala to a 300 very much, and value can mean a lot of things. Most people looking to buy a family car couldn't care less about fwd/rwd anymore (in fact, many are still under the impression that rwd is the devil because of snow, etc.). The Impala is a very good value. A solid, quiet structure, good ride and handling, very reliable powertrain, good features for the money. And, it is toward the end of its current model cycle anyway.

 

Most folks finance vehicles. 60 months is not an uncommon contract length many opt for in new car purchases these days.

Most people buy payment and try to get the car that fits the payment they can hack.

Even at zero finance every grand financed for 60 months is 16.66 per month hike. Five grand difference financed is an $83.00 a month rise. And that's talking zero percent rate. $80.00 a month higher would almost always be a deal breaker 99% of the time.

This is a part of the reason folks tend to "upgrade" their vehicle purchase when incentives are in place. Nearly everyone wants more car, but the "buy" payment. If they get more vehicle in the process they are happy.

There's a reason cars are compared in price ranges and out the door is more important than MSRP. Often an incentive can help a person that has no downstroke of cash secure a loan with some greater ease than the same amount financed but on a car that carries a shorter sticker price. As example, is the customer financing a 25K vehicle but only for 19K as opposed to a 19k vehicle with no downpayment... Depends on what the lender sees as equity and if the incentive is seen as reducing the lender's exposure.

 

I had a '01 Impala LS and it was a competent vehicle.
Got 30 mpg on te highway, no problem.
The interior was pretty cheap though and the leather got dirty easy.
I had the leather re-dyed before i sold it.
Impala is FWD and i won't own a FWD vehicle again.
I had the thermoplastic intake manifold replaced.
Front wheel bearing at $556.00.
Transmission solenoid at $530. Gm payed half of cost.

I just bought a Caddy SRX. It is three times the vehicle the Impala was. Paid 34K for the Caddy.

The 300C is very impressive. Gm needs to look out.
i see the 300 stealing a lot of sales.

 

So what you're saying is that a loaded Malibu Maxx competes directly with an Impala SS since they have similar out the door pricing.

A loaded Malibu Maxx MSRP's for $28,705. With some haggling and a $1,500 rebate you should be at $25,325 before tax. Right where true market value is for an Impala SS, (or even a G-note more than Impala SS according to your numbers).

I think to get that $10,000 price gap....you need to go heavy on the options for a 300C...and absolutely insane with the option boxes on a Magnum R/T.


If Dodge were dealing on Magnum R/T's.......you could get one for around $27,000....without rebates .

But of course...they are not currently dealing on Magnum R/T's and 300C's, because people are willing to pay sticker.


See the difference.

 

Which is my point exactly. What the cars sticker for and what they are sold for is completely different. That is why I included a reputable source's true market value pricing (with their inclusion of typical options) to reflect what the cars are actually going for. All I did was present the figures.

As is always the case, you're not going to catch a break when you want the latest toy. I can't imagine dealers are selling Magnums and 300s at invoice at this stage, either. It is pointless to argue "well, once they do start knocking some off the MSRP, then look how close...". If you're shopping for a car right now, that is not a consideration.

So there isn't any confusion, Edmunds TMV pricing for these models with no optional equipment:

Magnum R/T, $29995
300 C, $32995

And if you are spending $30K for a new car (rwd sedan), I don't see why you wouldn't consider G35, CTS, and 3-Series. Is the 300 still an overwhelming value?

 

The 300C is a $32K deal at best, is it not? A $30.00 a month up in price is important to people. The 300C is an entry level upper market attempt at a lower price inducement.

I couldn't venture if Chrysler's new tight pricing for MSRP is in play or not on this one. If it is, they will choke when rebates become necessary. If someone blew it, there a likely bloodletting scheduled again in Ann Arbor.

People tend to toss a $5 grand difference in price around with rough familiarity when they aren't buying. The rubber meets the road in the monthly payment.

Many people come into a car deal upside down. The balance is rolled into the next payment, as there is no free lunch here or on any other planet.

Mortgaging $32K is a $600.00 a month proposition under the best circumsatance. The 300C is unlikley to roll for the average customer that has to finance the whole deal and roll in their last "miscalculation".

$30 grand is where the air starts to get the beginnings of "thin". $30 and $25K are different buyers. There may well be folks that aspire to the 300C and go for the lower powered and equipped models. A $25K buyer will step anothe $100 a month only if compelled beyond belief. I don't see the 300 in any of it's iteration being a "must have" piece, but I'm not everybody. It will get buyers. What it will escalet is to be seen.

The GTO appeals far more to me as an enthusiast. The 300C is too high a beltline designwise for my taste. The automatic only deal is a killer for me as well. We shall see how it plays out. They are similarly priced. For those that must have 4 doors, well, another coffin in the coupe business case.

I applaud any car that's RWD. We shall see if it has the legs the K cars did in bringing DCX back into the spotlight.

 

One word:

HE-MI

 

lol...riiiight. More like GAS MILEAGE

 

Agreed 100%