Tonight I'm returning a Chrysler 300 Touring I rented for this weekend (can't lug family around in a Camaro), and now can offer a honest view of the new Chrysler.

My 1st experience with the 300 was sharing a 2-3 mile test drive of a 300C that included a freeway burst. I was wooed by the power that thing had, and awed by the fancy interior. But it's going to be the Touring that's going to be the 300's bread & butter (eventially), and actually having a chance to put over 500 miles on the Touring, I can get over the "Shock & Awe" of the 300C.

1st thing you notice about driving the 300 is it's brakes are..... um..... I'll tell you after I get the rest of my face off the windshield.

The next thing you have to get over is that it takes some getting used to. It's driving position feels more like a slammed truck, especially after driving Taurui, Grand Prixs, and Impalas (let alone a low & wide F-body). It's a comfortable position. It just makes the car feel narrow. The nearly flat windshield & very visible hood contribute.

The 3.5 V6 will not do a burnout no matter what you try! Trust me , I tried... and yes, I DID turn the anti-skid off!

Looking at the 300 Touring in the manner normal people will use it, and against what actual people will compare-shop it to (Impala, Grand Prix, LeSabre), it's actually a really nice car. It gets more attention than you are going to be used to, short of driving naked. It also has helpful ability of convincing cars to move out the way when you are barreling down the "fast" lane of the freeway at a "fast" speed. The only other vehicle I've ever driven that could clear a path like that had 4 wheel drive, and was taller than me.

The interior is very well made, and actually tends to be more enjoyable the longer you spend in it. BUT I'm no fan of the driver's seat. It's OK, but it's not anything to write home about. It's probally great for normal runs. But as far as running it over 500 miles in 2 days or so it gets a little uncomfortable. Maybe it's the upright seating position, but I wouldn't want to run this across the country. The hard Chrysler armrests get annoying after awhile, but at least the material it's made of will probally outlive me.

The trunk is simply HUGE!! I initially wanted to rent a Magnum because there was alot of things I had to haul down to Monterey from San Fran this weekend (none was available ), but everything I wanted to bring fit in the 300's trunk.

Fuel economy of the 3.5 is about on par with my LT1 Camaro. My guess is about 28mpg or so running mostly at 80-90 mph. I mentioned that the car was incapable of doing burnouts, but the car did have enough umph on the highway, and at least made some very impressive growls when floored. The handling was very good.

A big BIG relief from over-assisted or artificially firm steering of front wheel drive sedans today. The car is balenced, feels natural, and has better road holding than I expected from the 17" 215s on the car.

Visibility is exceptional. You'd expect the gun-slit windows to limit visibility, but it doesn't intrude at all. Visibility is actually better than Impala's IMO.

Overall, I can see why there are people ignoring GM & Ford's cut price sedans with bags of money on the hood, and going for the 300 touring with just a grand discount only with Chrysler financing. The cars are visually stunning. The interior, though not quite Mercedes level, is most certainly above anything from Japan, and feels alot like Volvo or Volkswagen level in fit, finish, and quality of materials. The engine, though no throughbred, is somewhat gutsy, the handling is very good, and the price makes you feel as if you ripped the dealer off.

In short, the reason the 300 (outside the "C") is doing so well is that it's competition in this price ranges is simply so pathetic! While everyone else for years has treated cars in this class & price range as cheap bargain cars, and let them feel that way, Chrysler did an outstanding job of making these cars feel more expensive than they actually are, and didn't underestimate customers by assuming that buyers in this class are addicted to RWD or wouldn't equate rebate with cheap.

That's the whole secret of Chrysler's success with the (non-Hemi) 300. Nothing more.

 

good points

 

I actually got to sit in a Magnum for the first time Saturday and I was extremely impressed! Haven't been in a 300 yet, though. Thanks for the review.

 

Lot's of torque management in these cars.

Even with the traction control turned off....the computer still intervenes.

BTW, I drove another Magnum RT last week. It's weird...there seems to be some variability in performance from car to car. The previous Magnum RT that I drove was a rocket! This one felt much slower....merely fast.

 

GuionM,

It looks like your are one step closer to purchasing that 2004 Pontiac GTO as soon as those big GM discounts begin on it in the next month or two.

 

There is some that think that the computer "let out more power" as more miles get put on the car. I guess so it will last a while.

I guess Chrysler rewrote the book on cars and now everyone has to play catchup.

 

Follow-up on the 300:

*Finally did a small burnout. It took a 4000 rpm neutral-drop. Gotta love rentals, but never buy one used.

*Found a seat lumbar lever where you'd expect a recline adjustment to be. I retract the less than flattering review of the driver's seat. It's actually pretty comfortable.

*The 300 is a blast to toss around. I went over to the local closed Army base, and tore up some corners in the abandoned neighborhood. More fun than you'd expect in this car.

*Finally, 95 mph in this car feels like 65-70 in the Camaro. Be forewarned.

 

Probally.

 

Word is that the computer restricts full engine output for the first 150 hours of operation.