GTP Cool Wall: 2002-2004 Chrysler 300M Special

[Ibonibo]

If your marketing departement comes up with the name "special", it's just.... oh well....

Too many 300C votes.... as on the countless other 300C votes, only the 2005 Estate would get a cool.

This is ugly, fake carbon (DIY car isle?) and is just as special as Timmy is special

SU

 

[Murcie_LP640]

think you are confusing "sports car" with "performance car". Sports cars are all about fun driving, and they don't need super high power outputs. The Mazda MX5 makes 167 horsepower, and that is enough for it. No one ever complains that it needs more.

Because it is very light, compact, and agile.

This car may possibly be the latter, I wouldn't know, I've never driven one.

But it is huge and very heavy. In fact, despite its relatively healthy 255hp, its power-to-weight ratio is a mere 2.5hp/tonne higher than the current 2.0L MX-5 which makes 153hp.

 

[SVT Cobra GT]

Doesn't look offensive but that's about it. Meh.

 

[Cowboy]

Despite the slightly "sporty" appearance, it's still a plain car. This edition is kinda like the Bonneville's SSEI, which is basically modified looks and a little more power than the stock counterpart.

Low meh.

 

[7up747]

Meh. Just another blank car.

 

[Parker]

Name three cool Chryslers:


Our survey said:


Oh. Guess not.

But I read on GTP that car enthusiasts are uncool, so if uncool people think something is uncool, doesn't that actually make it cool?

 

[Famine]

But I read on GTP that car enthusiasts are uncool, so if uncool people think something is uncool, doesn't that actually make it cool?

- Did that guy say that hoops are cool?
- No, he said they're stupid.
- Cool!

 

[Legro]

Okay let's be fair, if you were looking for a large relatively cheap and soft new car around here back in early 00s the 300M was the one you wanted. Mostly because Chrysler was the only pseudo-luxury manufacturer left in the market after the people who used to import American GM cars pulled out back in the 90s, but it wasn't the most terrible car for those who specifically wanted a large surprisingly well equipped soft automatic that costed about as much as an E-Class with a 2.2 diesel and a manual. It was never cool though, not only because Chrysler already had a bad image problem before the few years of trying to sell cars in Europe on a large scale, or because it looks like someone stepped on a PT Cruiser, but also because the only potential buyers of a new large pseudo-luxury saloon are either pensioners, or pensioners, or people who are very, very uncool for some other reason.

This 'Special' model isn't that much different from the other 300Ms, except that it's more pointless, because despite the fact the V6 engine was larger and often less diesel-y than in most similarly priced saloons, this tiny 'special' market niche it had never included people who were trying to find a sporty saloon, largely based on the fact the Chrysler-ness of the rest of the car was more or less repulsive to those who were looking for even vaguely sporty car. In fact the regular 300M was basically the least sporty saloon you could have bought back then for under 100,000€ (or 600,000 Finnish Marks before Euro became the legal currency in 2002). All this considered it isn't too difficult to imagine that the last things the potential buyers of the 300M wanted were stiffer suspension, sportier body kit, and fake carbon fibre.

 

[McLaren]

doesn't exactly scream "how do you come to this conclusion?"

Because apparently, it was already explained.

Sporty looks, good amount of power and torque, performance brakes and tires, and carbon fiber are just some of the things that make this car cool. Although it would be better if it was RWD, track performance was still exceptional. I'd like to drive one around a windy road or a racetrack someday, it would be fun.

High cool.

What @Beeblebrox237 is asking about it is this first sentence in that post:

This is the definition of a true sports sedan.

I get that current notion that folks should lay off, but stuff like the above and this are going to get a LOT of head scratching replies, esp. when the car being brought up alongside this 300M is arguably, the actual definition of a sport sedan.

Well it was 14 years ago. Not even the M5 had this much power. And, it's an American midsize sedan priced at just above $30k, 400 horsepower is a lot to expect for a price that cheap. Not to mention 400 horsepower in an FF car would cause massive understeer. It really doesn't need much more power than 255.

But the E39 M3 would be closer to a supercar than a sports sedan. An E39 M3 should be called a "high-performance sedan" since it made supercar like power. Sports driving is about having fun driving the car, not about having as much power as possible.

 

[MoLiEG]

Can't see anything "Special" about this thing.

Uncool.

 

[mustafur]

Heavy, not that powerful FWD and Automatic, meh.

 

[Snorevette]

But I read on GTP that car enthusiasts are uncool, so if uncool people think something is uncool, doesn't that actually make it cool?

That's just flawed logic. If I say that red apples are tasty, I am not claiming that all apples which aren't red are not tasty.

 

[Major_Arcana]

This is the definition of a true sports sedan.

 

[-Fred-]

One of my friends bought one of these as a winter beater a few years ago. We all laughed at him and his old man car. We went on an ice-fishing trip one weekend, 5 of us in total. The trunk is absolutely cavernous, and swallowed up 5 people of cargo with room to spare. Never missed a beat all weekend, cruised comfortably all the way there and back, registering some pretty spectacular fuel economy in the meantime. We all had a lot of fun.

But we still made fun of him and his old man car.

 

[LM7325]

Just went uncool. The LH cars last gasp. Too bad they went with a wimper.

 

[Razor440]

 

[SVX]

Because apparently, it was already explained.


I get that current notion that folks should lay off, but stuff like the above and this are going to get a LOT of head scratching replies, esp. when the car being brought up alongside this 300M is arguably, the actual definition of a sport sedan.

That's true and it was a bad example for me to use, but the point still stands at the instantaneous body pile on him. We know he has an interesting opinion to say at the least and I'm definitely not going to say he has a sound argument but it doesn't really give us any right to trigger it just for people to throw their weight around - especially when his unwarranted statements of it being a 'true definition of a performance sedan' are just as invalid as stating it's a slow pile of crap - which it has been claimed to have not.

Perhaps if more people were to provide factual responses to him it would provide a better understanding to Dodge as to the flaws in his argument - but bringing up weird tangents on expecting him to say that the Veyron is not a sports car/supercar whatever is not the way to do it.

 

[Parker]

That's just flawed logic. If I say that red apples are tasty, I am not claiming that all apples which aren't red are not tasty.

'Twas a joke, not meant to be taken seriously.

 

[niky]

In what way, other than that pretty grille, is this better than a V6 Camry?

Seriously Uncool.

-

I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of the thread. Not until the dust has settled.

 

[McLaren]

That's true and it was a bad example for me to use, but the point still stands at the instantaneous body pile on him. We know he has an interesting opinion to say at the least and I'm definitely not going to say he has a sound argument but it doesn't really give us any right to trigger it just for people to throw their weight around - especially when his unwarranted statements of it being a 'true definition of a performance sedan' are just as invalid as stating it's a slow pile of crap - which it has been claimed to have not.

Perhaps if more people were to provide factual responses to him it would provide a better understanding to Dodge as to the flaws in his argument - but bringing up weird tangents on expecting him to say that the Veyron is not a sports car/supercar whatever is not the way to do it.

I'm quite certain some have already done that. The M5 is once more an example of that; he declared it didn't have the power the 300M did & once corrected, he declared the M5 as a supercar, not a sport sedan.

This below is a portion of the review @Northstar provided.

Poised? Yes. Quicker? No. The Special clipped the 60-mph mark in 8.0 seconds, 100 mph in 22.7, and the quarter-mile in 15.9. Not shabby, but not any better than the last 300 we tested (March 2000), which reached 60 in 7.8, 100 in 21.2, and the quarter-mile in 15.9.

Although the Special's numbers don't set it apart from a standard 300, they do put it in another league when compared with front-drive competition such as the Acura 3.2TL Type-S and Infiniti I35. Unfortunately, that would be minor league, not major league. The 260-hp Type-S runs to 60 mph almost two seconds quicker at 6.2, nearly seven seconds faster to 100 mph at 16 flat, and more than a second quicker through the quarter-mile at 14.8. Similarly, the 255-hp I35 handily beats the Special in each category: 0 to 60 in 6.9, 100 in 18.2, and the quarter in 15.3.

The bigger footprints, lowered stance, stiffer suspension-performance-tuned with firmer strut damping and taller rear jounce bumpers-and firmer-feeling 17:1 steering-gear ratio (normal 300s get standard variable assist) enabled the Special to pull 0.82 g on the skidpad. That matches the standard 300M and I35's scores and is 0.01 g better than the Acura Type-S's. Chrysler claims the Special pulled 0.91 g, but that number seems suspect to us, considering a Porsche 911 managed only 0.90 g.

When it comes to stopping, however, 911 comparisons are not out of the question. The Special required just 167 feet to stop from 70 mph, a mere four feet more than the Carrera, not to mention an impressive 19 feet less than the plebeian 300 and the TL and 22 feet less than the I35. Chalk it up to the meaty Michelins and Euro-spec brakes that feature stiffer front calipers, outboard-vented rotors, and higher-performance linings.

For that kind of extra dough, the Special begins to look not so special, particularly considering its lack of forward progress over that of a normal 300. We do applaud Chrysler on a tastefully prepped package, but we just can't put our hands together for the performance.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/chrysler-300m-special-short-take-road-test

Too bad Car & Driver doesn't think it's a cool car, I wish they had my Mopar bias.

This is a factual response that basically refutes the OP's views on the 300M Special & yet his response shows nothing of "understanding the flaws in his argument"; he just wishes they were biased instead.

 

[SVX]

I'm quite certain some have already done that. The M5 is once more an example of that; he declared it didn't have the power the 300M did & once corrected, he declared the M5 as a supercar, not a sport sedan.

This below is a portion of the review @Northstar provided.



This is a factual response that basically refutes the OP's views on the 300M Special & yet his response shows nothing of "understanding the flaws in his argument"; he just wishes they were biased instead.

Fair enough. 👍

 

[axletramp]

It would only make Cool if A) you don't want to be noticed, or B) you badly needed a lift.

Uncool.

 

[The87Dodge]

@McLaren show me where I said that the Chrysler 300M Special is more powerful than an E39 M5.

 

[Obelisk]

@McLaren show me where I said that the Chrysler 300M Special is more powerful than an E39 M5.

Well it was 14 years ago. Not even the M5 had this much power. And, it's an American midsize sedan priced at just above $30k, 400 horsepower is a lot to expect for a price that cheap. Not to mention 400 horsepower in an FF car would cause massive understeer. It really doesn't need much more power than 255.

The way you phrased it implied the 300M is more powerful.

 

[TS050]

Let's not start this up again...

 

[Ameer67]

Always hated the 300M with a passion, the Special just makes it worse. Seriously uncool.

 

[Obelisk]

Let's not start this up again...

I'm not having a good day and seeing that post just annoyed me. I just was blowing his challenge out of the water.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I think 400hp V8 RWD 6MT might have been a better definition of a true sports sedan in the early 2000's.

Well it was 14 years ago. Not even the M5 had this much power.

To be fair, in context, this much power ... his comment was about the benchmark level I mentioned.

 

[Joey D]

I'm not having a good day and seeing that post just annoyed me. I just was blowing his challenge out of the water.

Then don't post if you're having a bad day, nothing good ever comes from it.

I don't think we need to go through yet another 5 page round of arguments over, what is essentially, an Intrepid in a fancy suit.

 

[Obelisk]

Then don't post if you're having a bad day, nothing good ever comes from it.

I don't think we need to go through yet another 5 page round of arguments over, what is essentially, an Intrepid in a fancy suit.

I'm better now. I'm just stressing over college. You know, finals and all that.

That said, the 300M doesn't look bad but...y'know. Not exactly sporty.