I wonder how badly they are pulling to the right? Just about every newer vehicle I've driven pulled to the right at least a little, and my Ram does it more than most I've seen. I don't even notice it anymore, so they must be pulling quite a bit. I have heard that many vehicles are designed to pull to the right just a bit so that if the driver falls asleep they won't go into oncoming traffic. Not sure if that's true or not, but I've noticed it on many cars and trucks.

 

And here I thought, reading this forum, the 300 was the greatest car ever built.

 

Hey, it it keeps them out of the left lane, it's okay by me.

 

I think redzed declared it to have unearthly powers....

 

Amen. Let me add that to my list of things I dislike about the 300... such as the bricky styling...

 

That actually kind of sux. How can the domestics ever defeat false perception if stuff like this happens? C'mon Chrysler, pull your heads out of your a$$es. You're on a roll, dont screw up now.

 

And just think. You guys were at the thought of the 5th Gen not having IRS. IRS does not always track straight. Ruts are your worst enemy. I have a 04 Cobra and this was replaced by a 01 Cobra. Sure, Jump in and say "It was a slapped on IRS" but I am talking about going in a straight line. I know 99% of any pulling is due to the design of the road (water runoff) but driving on a rutted road sucks. I hopefully will get to "testdrive" my buddies Z06 soon, To see how bad it tracks. I havent asked him if it "tracks" yet though.
I know the Marauder does'nt come equipped with "pulling to the right"

 

A Chrysler is a Chrysler

 

Here is a copy of the bulletin:

"SUBJECT:
Right Lead
OVERVIEW:
This bulletin involves adjusting the alignment to revised specifications.
MODELS:
2005 (LX) 300/Magnum
NOTE: This bulletin applies to vehicles built prior to April 25, 2004 (MDH 0425XX).
SYMPTOM/CONDITION:
The vehicle operator states the vehicle leads to the right.
DIAGNOSIS:
Drive the car on a FLAT road. If the car tracks straight, the vehicle operator is experiencing
crown sensitivity. If the vehicle tracks to the right, perform the Repair Procedure. Crown
sensitivity can not be eliminated in all the cases. Vehicles built on or after April 25, 2004
already have the alignment biased and no further action should be required or taken by the
dealer other than verifying the vehicle is set at the revised specifications listed in this
bulletin.
NOTE: Before evaluating the vehicle, it is important to check the following:
1. Tire pressure - Adjust tire pressure (if necessary) in all four wheels to
the pressure stated on the door placard.
2. Tire size & type - Verify that all four tires are the same size and type.
NOTE: When evaluating the vehicle, always drive the same road in both directions to
get a feel for the effect of road crown & cross wind.
SPECIAL TOOLS/EQUIPMENT REQUIRED:
NPN Alignment Equipment
REPAIR PROCEDURE:
1. Use the procedures outlined on TechCONNECT to set the wheel alignment to the
specifications below.
NUMBER: 02-003-04
GROUP: Suspension
DATE: May 25, 2004
NOTE: When aligning the front end to induce right caster bias (the vehicle will tend
to track toward the side with the least positive caster), target the cross caster
to be -0.8 degree and no more than -1.3 degrees. That means you will have
more caster on the right than on the left. Cross camber should be set in at
+0.2 - +0.3 degree. That means you will have more camber on the left than on
the right. Utilize the cradle shift method PRIOR to using the caster/camber
adjustment bolt kit, p/n 05134117AA. The adjustment bolts only provide
about 0.2 - 0.3 degree change and should only be used as a last resort. When
shifting the cradle, the passenger side of the cradle will move forward in car
and the driver's side will move rearward in car.
NOTE: After the cradle has been shifted, torque all 4 cradle bolts to 175Nm (130 ft.
lbs.).
CAUTION: If an adjustment bolt is to be installed do not allow the bolt head to turn
during disassembly or assembly, the cradle tension link joint or the lower
control arm bushing inner metal sleeve will be destroyed and require
replacement. THE NUT MUST BE UNTORQUED AND REMOVED, BEFORE
THE BOLT. Once the nut is removed the bolt can be slid out.
REVISED ALIGNMENT SPECIFICATIONS
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT PREFERRED SETTING ACCEPTABLE RANGE
CAMBER - LEFT -0.1° -0.60° to +0.40°
CAMBER - RIGHT -0.20° -0.70° to +0.30°
Cross-Camber (Maximum side-to-side
difference)
0.20° -0.30 to +0.60°
CASTER - LEFT +10.30° +9.00° to +12.10°
CASTER - RIGHT +11.10° +9.00° to +12.10°
Cross-Caster (Maximum side-to-side
difference)
-0.80° -1.30 to -0.50°
INDIVIDUAL TOE 0.10° -0.05° to +0.15°
TOTAL TOE** +0.20° 0.00° to +0.40°
Maximum side-to-side difference 0.00° 0.06°
RIDE HEIGHT - INDIVIDUAL 328mm (12 15/16 in.) 318 to 338mm (12 1/2 to 13
3/8 in.)
CROSS RIDE HEIGHT 0 -12 to +12mm (1/2 in.)
REAR WHEEL ALIGNMENT PREFERRED SETTING ACCEPTABLE RANGE
CAMBER* -0.75° -1.25° to -0.25°
Cross-Camber (Maximum side-to-side
difference)
0.00° -0.50 to 0.50°
INDIVIDUAL TOE 0.10° -0.05° to +0.25°
02-003-04 -2-
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT PREFERRED SETTING ACCEPTABLE RANGE
THRUST ANGLE 0.0° -0.50° to +0.50°
RIDE HEIGHT - INDIVIDUAL 296mm (11 5/8 in.) 286 to 306mm (11 1/4 to 12
in.)
CROSS RIDE HEIGHT 0 -12 to +12mm (1/2 in.)
Notes:
Vehicle height and suspension alignment values reflect after vehicle spring settling values.
* For reference only. These are non-adjustable angles.
** TOTAL TOE is the sum of both left and right wheel toe settings. TOTAL TOE must be equally
split between each front wheel to ensure the steering wheel is centered after setting toe. Positive
toe is toe-in and negative toe is toe-out
POLICY:
Reimbursable within the provisions of the warranty.
TIME ALLOWANCE:
Labor Operation No: Description Amount
02-00-02-90 Set Front and Rear Toe / Center Steering Wheel 0.7 Hrs.
02-00-01-91 Alignment Using Cradle Adjustment and Set
Front and Rear Toe / Center Steering Wheel
1.0 Hrs.
FAILURE CODE:
LM Leads Right
-3- 02-003-04"

 

i wouldnt buy a hemi car to begin with
ive been reading a few RAM forums, and you wouldnt believe the hell people are going thru, when trying to make "programmers" for these engines
people are going crazy just for crappy handheld programmers like a hypertech, i doubt anything like LS1Edit or HPTuners will be out for the hemi's for a long time
dont expect any big cammed hemi's anytime soon, without a standalone

us GenIII gm's have it soooo easy

 

that's the Merc influence. Mercedes ECUs are notorious for being difficult to "crack" and have multiple redundent failsafe "killswitches" if you do crack it.

 

Ah...looks like Chrysler engineering is back to it's old tricks...

So what you're all saying is paying $18K-$35K to be a beta tester is a bit too steep?

 

The "pull to the right" tendancy on early build 300s is correct. The Magnum was delayed in part to this (it was initially to come out only weeks behind the 300, but instead was over a month behind.

The 300 has a tendancy to pull to the right. It's not like the car is headed for the guardrail (remember, I actually drove one), it's more like a front end that's just barely out of alignment or a tire pressure that's a few pounds down. No where near what some of you are making it out to be. As was mentioned, Chrysler isn't the only car on the road that has had something like this.

So, before we start slashing into the car, you should ask yourself "Is this slight pull to the right problem as bad as:"

*GM's current recall on 97-04 Corvettes to fix an electronic locking steering column that could lock up while driven?

*GM's current recall on '98-01 Cavaliers & Sunfires that have the same ignition problem Ford had back in '89: Overheating ignition switches that could develop into fires?

*GM's current recall on ALL Lumina, Grand Prix, Intrigue, Malibu, Monte Carlo, Cutlass, & Regal due to a power steering defect that results in intermitten sudden loss of power steering on left turns?

*GM's current recall on 95-97 Auroras for cracking fuel lines that may cause engine fires? [NHTSA Recall No. 04V110/GM Recall No. 04014]

*GM's current recall on 2000 onward full sized pickup trucks in which the cable holding the tailgate can prematurely corrode and suddenly drop the tailgate (lots of fun if you are behind one on the freeway)? [NHTSA Recall No. 04V129/GM Recall No. 04007]

*GM's current recall on faulty liftgate latch structures on 2003-2004 Buick Rendezvous that could break off in an accident, ejecting the occupants from the vehicle? [NHTSA Recall No. 04V150/GM Recall No. 03030A]

*GM's current recall on the Cadillac SRX which due to a faulty brake program, can isolate the driver from any braking action for almost 1.5 seconds in an emergency braking situation (more than enough to creat a nasty crash)? [NHTSA Recall No. 04V151/GM Recall No. 04018]

*GM's current recall on the Malibu to fix faulty anti-lock brakes & seatbelts that may detach in an accident?

http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/gm26_20040326.htm
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/r...news.html?NEWS


So, let's keep some perspective here. A car that pulls about as much as most FWD cars under light acceleration doesn't mean "Chrysler is up to it's old tricks", or the 300 is suddenly a bad car. This article appeared in USA today day before yesterday:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...chrysler_x.htm

If this car were a Chevy Impala, I suspect reactions would be different. However, Chrysler (in contrast to GM) took a bold move, and brought back not just a family RWD car, or a high powered RWD sedan, they are selling these things in such massive numbers that the only car GM currently makes in this class that can outsell the thing are Impalas that GM has to bribe people (with up to $6,000 cash! ) to take.

I won't even mention the fact that if you discount fleet & rental sales, and considering that there is 5 Chevrolet dealers for every 1 Chrysler dealer the 300 is simply handing Impala it's head. That wouldn't be fair.


I figured I would take the pro-300 stance since it's the type of car GM is dragging it's feet to build (remember, Impala won't be RWD till 2009!) and to head off the herd mentality begining to take place here. Besides, I haven't posted in awhile.

 

whoa whoa whoa...this isnt bash GM time. The 300, a car that is praised up and down here on this site, has a fatal flaw that now has people giving there 300's back. Dont get so upset.
2 cars I dont see up there in that list that have been compared to the 300C. The CTS-V and GTO. BOTH are not up there, both have zero problems. Both are better then the supermegafantastic 300.
You can take the Merc out of a Chrysler, but you cant take the Chrysler out of a Merc...

 

No car is free of problems - including the GTO and CTS-V....

GTO Problems

CTS-V HP issues

Like most cars, most problems are minor - some are not.