 | |
Re: Fiat Chief Shuffles Chrysler Exec Lineup
Chrysler Dodge, Plymouth, Jeep, Eagle, etc info/talk (rec.autos.makers.chrysler)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Fiat Chief Shuffles Chrysler Exec Lineup -
10-09-2009
, 06:17 PM
|
Have you sat in and driven the Fiat 500 or are you making assumptions about it? I've never even seen one. |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Titchy car gallery: http://www.fiat.com/cgi-bin/pbrand.dll/FIAT_COM/showroom/selectModel.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@0783095708.125512 6494@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccciadeihmjhfefcefecejgdfkhdf jj.0&categoryOID=-1073761346 DAS To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling" --- "Ashton Crusher" <demi (AT) moore (DOT) net> wrote in message news:4gpuc5lg8nl3tl3316akhgrkjumnq2jvnu (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... [...] Have you sat in and driven the Fiat 500 or are you making assumptions about it? I've never even seen one. |
There isn't a whole lot of real info I could find, like shoulder room,
hip room, leg room so I couldn't get a good feel for how it might
"feel". But from what info there is I would agree with the CEO's
statement that "if done right" it could be a hit here in the US, esp
with younger people who are not as tied into the "large" car model.
Even at that, I've found quite a few older people who used to drive
large cars who have switched to sub-compacts and who love them,
including my Dad who always used to drive Cadillacs and the like. Now
he's got a Matrix/Vibe and he loves it. What seems to be the key for
many people, aside from looks, is entry/exit ease, comfortable seats,
reasonable acceleration, and good gas mileage. Particularly when just
about every car now comes with the "luxuries" standard, like electric
windows/locks and AC. Since lots of new car buyers trade every 2 to 4
years, if they put a bumper to bumper warranty of 3 years on these
things it would go a long way to eliminate peoples concerns over
whether they are going to have problems with them.
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:09:19 GMT, Some O <SO (AT) nospam (DOT) net> wrote: In article <25GdnafyaJrCnVDXnZ2dnUVZ8lqdnZ2d (AT) pipex (DOT) net>, "Dori A Schmetterling" <nobody (AT) spam (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Whether a tiny car like the Fiat 500 will suit the US is one thing, but to suggest it is a direct successor of the old little cars is rather silly. There is a "bit of" a difference between the typical Italian and USA driver body size. The Fiat 500 will fit only a few. Have you sat in and driven the Fiat 500 or are you making assumptions about it? I've never even seen one. |
They stood out in that I had to bend my knee around the steering wheel
to hit the brake. It wasn't safe for me to drive them.
One was a Fiat Uno 1L , it's gave poor mileage for it's size and only
made more noise when more power was asked of it.
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
By my calculation 1957 was 52 years ago which was my point. I can't think of a single Chrysler product since the 50s except the 300C that could draw stares. When my 300C was new (in 05) and I went to a restaurant with valet parking they would leave it out front with the Mercedes and BMWs, I've never had that happen with any other car that I've owned. I still think it's a classically beautiful car even though the lousy Chrysler quality is starting to worry me and I have no doubt that in 50 years it will draw looks just like a 57 would today. |
I had a Magnum (300 SW) for a two week rental, that was enough.
One of the best Chrysler cars in the last 50 years is the 300M. A few
in the service dept at my Chrysler dealer said it first, I agreed.
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
One of the best Chrysler cars in the last 50 years is the 300M. |
You GOTTA be kidding! The 300M is one of the best in the past 10 years
for sure. Maybe the past 20, although I'd rank all of the
first-generation LH cars qual to the 300M mechanically, and the 2nd gen
Intrepid and Concorde above it in looks (it looks bob-tailed- ruins the
long flowing lines the LH series wears so well.) But 50? No way. There
are many other models that beat it when you get back to the 60s, let
alone the 50s.
Don't get me wrong- I don't like the look of the LX 300. I prefer the
Magnum and Charger and especially the Challenger. But mechanically
they're all head and shoulders above the 300M. The LX platform is one of
the best-handling, most rigid, and most stable on the road in its price
range... from ANY manufacturer.
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
Josh S wrote: One of the best Chrysler cars in the last 50 years is the 300M. You GOTTA be kidding! The 300M is one of the best in the past 10 years for sure. Maybe the past 20, although I'd rank all of the first-generation LH cars qual to the 300M mechanically, and the 2nd gen Intrepid and Concorde above it in looks (it looks bob-tailed- ruins the long flowing lines the LH series wears so well.) But 50? No way. There are many other models that beat it when you get back to the 60s, let alone the 50s. Don't get me wrong- I don't like the look of the LX 300. I prefer the Magnum and Charger and especially the Challenger. But mechanically they're all head and shoulders above the 300M. The LX platform is one of the best-handling, most rigid, and most stable on the road in its price range... from ANY manufacturer. |
He thought it was a 300 which he also hates the look of.
When I clarified the difference he said what a difference, a lovely
looking car.
I had a '95 LH, definitely not equal to the 300M mechanically, although
the LH2 cars are closer. But after all they weren't sports sedans, so
no comparison.
Unfortunately the LH2 Intrepid is too squashed looking in the front,
it's a Sebring test styling.
The LH2 Concorde is too long and not as good a handling car.
I agree the 300 is a solid vehicle, but it looks it's part with a truck
like front end and very shallow windows. Of course it's additional
weight of several hundred lbs. drags down the 3.5L engine, which is more
than adequate in the 300M.
One day a 300C was parked beside my LH Concorde, as I approached from
the front I couldn't believe how ugly the 2008 300C looked beside my
lovely looking oldie '95 Concorde.
Even if the 300 was FWD which I need, I would never buy it.
Lets face it, there those who like a macho boxy car design, there are
more who want a smooth graceful design. The pimps agree with you, as
I'm sure you've noticed.
BTW I've rented the LH2 Intrepid several times for about 6 weeks total
and a Magnum for 2 weeks. The Intrepid I could live with, but sorry the
Magnum was not even close to my desires.
As for the large gas burning hulking over chromed heavy monster cars of
the 50s/70s, I was never interested in them. Just not my thing. the
European sport sedan approach to design is what interests me.
I find it interesting that so many popular cars of the last several
years have adopted the 300M styling profile. Obviously it's well liked
and Chrysler set the trend way back in the late 90s when they were still
running their business themselves.
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <v9-dnWouk4enN2DXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d (AT) texas (DOT) net>, Steve <no (AT) spam (DOT) thanks> wrote: Josh S wrote: One of the best Chrysler cars in the last 50 years is the 300M. You GOTTA be kidding! The 300M is one of the best in the past 10 years for sure. Maybe the past 20, although I'd rank all of the first-generation LH cars qual to the 300M mechanically, and the 2nd gen Intrepid and Concorde above it in looks (it looks bob-tailed- ruins the long flowing lines the LH series wears so well.) But 50? No way. There are many other models that beat it when you get back to the 60s, let alone the 50s. Don't get me wrong- I don't like the look of the LX 300. I prefer the Magnum and Charger and especially the Challenger. But mechanically they're all head and shoulders above the 300M. The LX platform is one of the best-handling, most rigid, and most stable on the road in its price range... from ANY manufacturer. When I told my brother in law I bought a 300M he almost freaked out. He thought it was a 300 which he also hates the look of. When I clarified the difference he said what a difference, a lovely looking car. I had a '95 LH, definitely not equal to the 300M mechanically, although the LH2 cars are closer. But after all they weren't sports sedans, so no comparison. Unfortunately the LH2 Intrepid is too squashed looking in the front, it's a Sebring test styling. The LH2 Concorde is too long and not as good a handling car. I agree the 300 is a solid vehicle, but it looks it's part with a truck like front end and very shallow windows. Of course it's additional weight of several hundred lbs. drags down the 3.5L engine, which is more than adequate in the 300M. One day a 300C was parked beside my LH Concorde, as I approached from the front I couldn't believe how ugly the 2008 300C looked beside my lovely looking oldie '95 Concorde. Even if the 300 was FWD which I need, I would never buy it. Lets face it, there those who like a macho boxy car design, there are more who want a smooth graceful design. The pimps agree with you, as I'm sure you've noticed. BTW I've rented the LH2 Intrepid several times for about 6 weeks total and a Magnum for 2 weeks. The Intrepid I could live with, but sorry the Magnum was not even close to my desires. As for the large gas burning hulking over chromed heavy monster cars of the 50s/70s, I was never interested in them. Just not my thing. the European sport sedan approach to design is what interests me. I find it interesting that so many popular cars of the last several years have adopted the 300M styling profile. Obviously it's well liked and Chrysler set the trend way back in the late 90s when they were still running their business themselves. |
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <v9-dnWouk4enN2DXnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d (AT) texas (DOT) net>, Steve <no (AT) spam (DOT) thanks> wrote: Even if the 300 was FWD which I need, I would never buy it. Lets face it, there those who like a macho boxy car design, there are more who want a smooth graceful design. |
purchasing a new 2010 PT Cruiser.
They were pushing leftover Sebrings, the ones with the raked hood that
to me is plain fugly.
Why do so many cars today look like wanna be trucks, rather than cars?
I want my cars to be cars, like my 2000 3ooM with 28,000 miles in the
garage,
my 95 T-Bird, or the new Challenger.
If I didn't need an inexpensive multi purpose vehicle like the PT
Cruiser I would have taken home a hemi Challenger
#19
| |||
| |||
|
|
I was at the local Chrysler dealer a few days back and ended up purchasing a new 2010 PT Cruiser. They were pushing leftover Sebrings, the ones with the raked hood that to me is plain fugly. Not only ugly, but very impractical when you get snow freezing on it. |
that far with it.
That hood and the inability to hold a full size tire in the spare
compartment, ended my consideration of that Sebring as my next car.
I believe the dumb hood is changed this year.
Quote:
|
Why do so many cars today look like wanna be trucks, rather than cars? It's mainly Chrysler, they must have dumped all their car designers. |
every model these days.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.