[DaveW]

Pretty sure the mini van/people carrier thing was invented by Renault with the espace?

*Edit* Ah nope guess they were not..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Espace

 

[IH8Rice]

part of the reason Chrysler could be at the forefront of trends was that they took more risks than the other two (PT Cruiser, Prowler, Magnum, 300C were all cars the other two never could have introduced). More risk means more success and more failure.

if by forefront you mean, taking a old Mercedes (which owned chrysler at the time) chassis/suspension and making it into a 300/Magnum, then they did.

id be more than happy to defend a mopar since i grew up loving their E and A body cars from the 60-70's, but the past few years of crappy products and un-innovative designs make it hard to say i still love them

 

[rockwool]

if by forefront you mean, taking a old Mercedes (which owned chrysler at the time) chassis/suspension and making it into a 300/Magnum, then they did.

id be more than happy to defend a mopar since i grew up loving their E and A body cars from the 60-70's, but the past few years of crappy products and un-innovative designs make it hard to say i still love them

I don't quite agree with you there (although very few US models are represented here, probably only the good ones), the 300 is a perfect example of the new American design style, he retro cars are more than allright, the new Voyager, and all the Jeeps..

So the 300 is a late 90s S-class? I knew they had Merc diesel engines, and probably trannys, in them.

 

[MMike]

Personally I think Chrysler is the least bad of the 3....to my knowledge anyway, I think they were the first to really employ CATIA to fully model the vehicle. And ...again as far as I know, they were the first to really productionize a concept car....ie: the Neon. The whole "cab forward" thing in the early 90's was a big deal.

I think Lee did some good stuff while he was around.

And as things stand, I still like the look of more of their cars that any Ford or Chevy. (Mustang notwithstanding....they are pretty sweet)

 

[IH8Rice]

I don't quite agree with you there (although very few US models are represented here, probably only the good ones), the 300 is a perfect example of the new American design style, he retro cars are more than allright, the new Voyager, and all the Jeeps..

So the 300 is a late 90s S-class? I knew they had Merc diesel engines, and probably trannys, in them.

no the 300 was a 96-02 E class, not the S class. the engines in the LX cars are obviously Mopars i.e.: both hemi engines and the v6's and there were chrysler trannys in them too, not merc's.
here in the states, most manufacturers dont unfortunately offer diesels in wide range yet, unlike europe and the rest of the world.

the retro type styling involved with the new 300 is derived from ideas from the older generations of 300 from the 50's and up. they did hit the nail on the head when designing the newer 300/300C cars

 

[IH8Rice]

Personally I think Chrysler is the least bad of the 3....to my knowledge anyway, I think they were the first to really employ CATIA to fully model the vehicle. And ...again as far as I know, they were the first to really productionize a concept car....ie: the Neon. The whole "cab forward" thing in the early 90's was a big deal.

I think Lee did some good stuff while he was around.

And as things stand, I still like the look of more of their cars that any Ford or Chevy. (Mustang notwithstanding....they are pretty sweet)

i agree.
their "cab forward" design was definitely forward thinking and was implemented in other mfg's vehicles as well.
their older Concorde/LHS/Intrepid were some examples of their cab forward design

 

[rockwool]

no the 300 was a 96-02 E class, not the S class. the engines in the LX cars are obviously Mopars i.e.: both hemi engines and the v6's and there were chrysler trannys in them too, not merc's.
here in the states, most manufacturers dont unfortunately offer diesels in wide range yet, unlike europe and the rest of the world.

the retro type styling involved with the new 300 is derived from ideas from the older generations of 300 from the 50's and up. they did hit the nail on the head when designing the newer 300/300C cars

I didn't mean the Hemi's, naturally, suspected no about the V6's, only meant the diesel engines. Quite a few 300's roll around as taxicabs on our streets thanks to those Merc diesels! Maybe Obama will change that for you as GWB has been against anything that consumes little.

His future plans on expanding E85 has probably to do with two things. For one; Volvo and Saab are hughe on E85 due to stupid Swedish diesel hostile laws, and two; he wants to keep the third world starving by forcing them to grow sugarcanes instead of food.

I didn't know the 300 was that much of a retro design (except for the headlights). Still, I think that incoorporating design from ones own history into newer designs is nothing but a positive thing. That builds up the brands identity, more so than comming up with new styles that don't have anything to doo with what is Chrysler.

A perfect example of what I mean is the Cab Forward thingie that Chrysler pushed soo hard in the 90's. Too me, that was a brand that was trying to shake of their americano-japanese look and find them selves something of their own, just like a teenager searching him self. Cab Forward might have been hot **** interior space wise, but exterior wise it was very teenagish.

Then take the Alfa 156, which might have been the first of cars to incoorporate old design with new when it came back in 1996/7. It is probaby Alfas best seller just because it did this, and in such great style too boot, both exterior as interior wise.

Going back through their models one can easily recognize the family belonging, but also what model it had replaced; 155, 75/90, Giulietta, Alfetta.
Other brands have similar stuff; BMW with their C-pillar junction, Volvo with their A-pillar ditto etc.

Heritage going back in a brands design is a strength. Look at Alfa Romeo 8C Competitzione!

 

[rockwool]

With this car, I don't understand how Chrysler can have a problem.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/sema-2008-foose-terracuda/1139972/

Even the interior looks good for an American car (otherwise those retro muscle cars leave a lot to wish for):

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/sema-2008-foose-terracuda/1139978/

 

[IH8Rice]

that '70 Cuda is just beautiful and designed by a true car genius.


and about the E85 comment, America would be better off using diesel since its pollutes less, could create more power, get better fuel economy and is significantly more readily available than E85. you cant find E85 anywhere near where i live.
oh, and E85 comes from corn, not sugarcane

 

[Toshi]

do you have a source for the claim that modern diesels pollute less over the lifecycle (including fuel production) than modern E85 cars?

also, ethanol can be produced from many sources. corn is the predominant one but brazil, among other places, is banking big on sugarcane, and cellulosic ethanol is always "just around the corner".

 

[IH8Rice]

do you have a source for the claim that modern diesels pollute less over the lifecycle (including fuel production) than modern E85 cars?

also, ethanol can be produced from many sources. corn is the predominant one but brazil, among other places, is banking big on sugarcane, and cellulosic ethanol is always "just around the corner".

yes i do, but not with me right now....except for the production of it. it inherently is more pollutive to produce than E85.


heres something quick about Mercedes clean diesels:
http://truebluesolutions.mercedes-benz.com/tbs/index.en

their diesel produces harmless nitrogen and water from nitrogen oxides

 

[rockwool]

A diesel doesn't pollute less than an equivalent E85 car, not even one with class 1 diesel and a particle filter on. Although, unlike E85, it doesn't constitute any strain on the starving people of the world. That said, if a particle filtered diesel car can take B20 diesel without its PF getting clogged, then that will be a far superior alternative than anything that's readily availible today and the near future.

 

[rockwool]

yes i do, but not with me right now....except for the production of it. it inherently is more pollutive to produce than E85.


heres something quick about Mercedes clean diesels:
http://truebluesolutions.mercedes-benz.com/tbs/index.en

their diesel produces harmless nitrogen and water from nitrogen oxides

Stoopid page, I can't scroll and stuff so I've only read a littel but it seems frikkin fantastic!

 

[IH8Rice]

Stoopid page, I can't scroll and stuff so I've only read a littel but it seems frikkin fantastic!

try using IE, sometimes FF wont allow me to see it as well.

this technology is currently available too, though just not as widespread in the states because its diesel.

 

[ohio]

if by forefront you mean, taking a old Mercedes (which owned chrysler at the time) chassis/suspension and making it into a 300/Magnum, then they did.

You're agreeing with me. I'll repeat (again. for the 4th time in this thread) I think Chryslers are piles of ****.

However, that doesn't change the fact that their marketing and (exterior) design departments were very very forward thinking. Their procurement (okay, but build it for 40% less), engineering (well if we only get 60% of the BOM we need, we'll just re-use the e-class platform, and use an underrated drivetrain), and manufacturing (eh, close enough) sucked though.

 

[IH8Rice]

You're agreeing with me. I'll repeat (again. for the 4th time in this thread) I think Chryslers are piles of ****.

umm i dont think that i did agree with you, nor will i.

my comment was stating that the LX cars were nothing "forward thinking" since it was a redesigned E-series Merc.....which theres nothing wrong with. the e-class Merc was fairly successfull for Merc and chrsyler was able to capiltize on their older chassis and shoving a good ol' hemi into it.

im a die hard mopar fan, and itll take a lot for me to say that their entire lineup is crap. granted the sebring stands out like a white man in the million man march though.
their drivetrain is far from being underrated. their Hemi w/ MDS has been long appraised since the Hemi's revival, and it made the 300 into a sleeper, the 300C or 300 SRT8.



and we dont need to hear your opinion 4 times, as you stated, that their cars are crap.

 

[ohio]

umm i dont think that i did agree with you, nor will i.

my comment was stating that the LX cars were nothing "forward thinking" since it was a redesigned E-series Merc

Seriously, are you retarded or being obtuse on purpose?

My statement has nothing to do with the platform they used for the cars. That they used the E-series is entirely irrelevant. I feel stoopid for even having to point this out but, forward thinking marketing =/= forward thinking engineering. Stop equating the two.

For the market, the 99% of people in the country who don't even know what a platform is, let alone understanding one shared between a German and American automaker, they are completely different cars, with a broad, edgy, "American" appeal. Kudos to Chrysler marketing and design. Again.