At first blush I was very impressed with these cars. But, then I remembered that Chrysler product quality is far below Ford's. I had to give my Voyager to charity as it was very unreliable and costing me thousands to keep running.

Don't let the German/American styling and the Hemi fool you, these cars are built like a POS. Read the reliability data given in Consumer's Reports (ignore the lame discussion though) and you'll see how far back Chrysler is.

Nothing has the fast, fun and affordable qualities of a Mustang. Nothing.

 

Looks like "a giant door on wheels".
Comparing this car to the mustang seems kinda pointless,to my view they seem to be going after two completely different markets segments.
1.people who want a great looking car with 40+ years of devotion and love
2.or people who want a butt ugly bathtub with a grill that only a mother could love

 

I can think of a few cars that are uglier than the 300C (which I kinda like in a sick sorta way).

Honda Element
Pontiac Aztek
Toyota Prius
Buick Rendezvous
Chevrolet Camaro (I've never liked the newer style)
Subaru Baja
Dodge Durango (new one looks piggish)
Chevrolet SSR
Chevrolet Uplander (see below)
etc.

And I disagree with whoever said people here don't like it because of the retro look. An ugly front grill is gonna be ugly no matter what. :notnice:

 

That vehicle is ugly long before the grille. It's a pre-requisite for being a GM vehicle.

 

I am starting to think that GM designers sit down at meetings at the development of a new car and say, "How ugly can we make this thing?"

Oh yeah, add the Malibu and Malibu Maxx to that list. :notnice:

 

Look at the picture enough said!!!!

 

I would get a 300C for a different purpose, not to replace te Mustang. Man I just love the way it looks.

 

Oh forgot Hi everyone I am new to this forum and will be the proud owner of a 2005 sonic blue Mustang next spring . Now that the introductions are done I would like to make a comment. There is nothing like a Mustang and GM found that out when the Comaro and Firebird were axed due poor sales.They could not out sell the Mustang together even with the Comaro and Firebird being faster. So too say the Chrysler 300 will come in and give it competition as far as sales that to me is untrue plus it is comparing apples and oranges. Don't get me wrong it is a nice looking car but it is no Mustang

 

When you consider the regular 300C with the Hemi is at $30K plus, it's more like the 300C SRT-8 will "definitely" be more than the Mustang GT. It's "likely" it'll top $40K.

 

Actually the 300C starts at ~$24K and goes up to $34K for a loaded Hemi.

A friend is actually considering an SRT-8 for next year. Gotta get those 4.10s.

 

Incorrect. The 300 starts at 24k. The 300C IS the Hemi version.

 

HARDLY competition... HAH- like it was said before- it just doesn't measure up- AT ALL- i mean it is ugly..... and besides- the mustang is in a class all its own now- it doesn't NEED competition to be good- it just is...

 

Seen a few 300C's out on the road and they are truly horrendous-looking. I saw a Brit review on it and the interior is even flimsier and cheaper than my SN95, replete with parts out of MB's reject bin. The Magnum, on the other hand, is very good looking in person, and having sat in one for a few minutes it seems to have gotten the interior treatment the 300C should have gotten. The 300C isn't a Mustang competitor, and probably won't be around in 3-5 years when the excitment wears off.

 

Personally, I don't like the design. However, I am glad they are creating a "different" look. The 80s and 90s were all about making cars (mid-cost and below anyway) look the same. For a while, I thought everything was eventually going to look like a taurus. Thankfully, Ford, Chrysler, Nissan and a few others are breaking the mold.

 

Check out the video on this page:
linky

The drifting video that is.

Pretty funny... B)

 

I don't know. I want to call shenanigans, but I just can't be sure...

The top silver coupe's front window on the pax side seems a bit weird at the top.

The convertible's side seems to have been stretched to make it a two door (chopping a top at that angle shouldn't be hard...) Look at the exactly identical rocks and stuff along the rear edge.

Finally, I find that allpar.com and chargerforums.com doesn't seem to have a clue about it. I do believe that between the two of them, they'd know.

The autothing.com article is a bit vague as well.

And JFTR, IMO, it's in no way competition. Just ain't happening. Way different cars. Like Foci and Lamborghini's.

 

Houtex, the coupe and convertible renderings above were done for Car and Driver (if I recall) by an artist. They were done in response to a Chrysler press release that these were in the works. So, it is hard to say how "close' these are. But, given the 300's brick like stature it's hard to imagine they will look very different. Especially the convertible.

 

Is it me or do all chysler products look the same.

 

Woah! That thing looks like

 

Chrysler has a nack for creating "short-term" high-demand cars.

Think back to the "K" car created by Iacocca's hand, the same hand that helped the Mustang come into our lives. Amazingly, the K-car sold like hotcakes for 2-3 years, then fell off. Next, jump forward to the Mitsubishi Eclipse/ Eagle Talon/Plymouth Laser trio. Within 4 years, only the Mitsubishi Eclipse remained. Next came the Neon, sold under both Plymouth and Dodge. Within 2 years, it was sold only as a Dodge. Next came the Stratus, with 4 years they scrapped the Stratus design, but took the Avenger/Sebring and called it a Stratus. Next in line, the formidable PT Cruiser, you could not hardly buy one for the first 2 years, now they hardly sell.

As quoted, in 3-5 years, the 300 series probably won't even be around.