Well, he would, wouldn’t he? I mean, if Detroit was going to build a car for Scott Burgess, the 300C SRT8 would be it. Massive horsepower and . . . massive horsepower. Did I mention massive horsepower? What about massive horsepower? “The 425 horsepower instills confidence that few other engines can. Zero to 60 mph in five seconds; less than 12 seconds later and you’re cruising at 100 mph. It blasts off at lights and makes passing anything on the road as easy as stepping on the accelerator.” So, anything else then? “More importantly, for the 2009 model, engineers changed out some of the suspension to give it a smoother ride and recalibrated the antilock brakes and electronic stability program to make it even sportier. Even in the normal stability control setting, which would be the most restricting, the 300C SRT8 keeps it fun. Slam through a corner and the back end twists just enough to remind you how much fun driving can be.” Ah, power slides in a lumbering Yank tank. I’m so there! No really. Of course, no Burgess review of a car he likes would be complete without a chip on the shoulder FU to eco-weenies and Detroit haters . . .
Now I know there are people out there that question any performance vehicle. Why does the world need a gut-wrenching machine that can turn just about any person’s knuckles white the first time they’re in it? I would answer that question with another one, Why did we send a man to the moon? What else are we going to do with a rocket?
Of course, those people have never met Chrysler LLC’s Street and Racing Technology team. They are an incredible bunch, who get up every morning hoping to find new ways to defy physics.
Oh, and all of their projects, including the 300C SRT8, turn a profit. Something I thought Detroit’s carmakers were supposed to do.
They are obviously building cars people want. And I’m one of them.
Well, that’s one.
It may be brand new . . . Introduced as a 2006 model, Chrysler has tweaked the 2009 model, giving it a new grille, a new color (Deep Water Blue Clear Coat) and added a number of standard features such as a sun roof.
So, Scott thinks a new grille, a new color, and a piece of glass in the roof, gratis, qualifies as “brand new?”
The only thing more brutal than this car’s acceleration is it’s depreciation.
Who the hell needs a 425-hp, 12 mpg, $45K chrysler? ….almost no one.
The Charger, one of the brighter spots in Chrysler’s stable is the 300’s mean sister. I have a Daytona and absolutely love the car. Driven all of the SRT stable, and they have done an excellent job. My Daytona (R/T) has seen gas mileage as high as 27, at 70 mph. On the highway, closer to traffic flow speeds, typically will see 25mpg. Best part, it’s a true hybrid, burning gas and rubber :) Fun, comfortable, relatively fuel efficient, and a blast to drive.
How anyone can conceive of a 300 as a “performance vehicle” is utterly beyond me.
Here comes the Chrysler hate, no one that slams this cars performance can honestly say they have driven one and if they have they are either dead inside or an eco-wennie.
I’ve driven these and their Dodge brothers many times and while they aren’t AMGs, M5s or even current CTS-Vs, they are a hell of alot of performance for MUCH less dough. What else even comes close for the money?
Hey the gas milage sucks large (so does any car with 425 horses)and for sure there are other down falls the biggest by far being resale value, but this is an awsome car if what you are looking for is bang for your buck. To me the lower resale value is great because it means the car is more attainable. (I only buy used anyway, no car is worth its new price to me, only the wife gets new here)
Back on topic and to the point of Roberts story yes I would agree that the Detroit News and all its writers are “homers”, but I you really can’t blame them for their D-3 chearleading. They are just trying to offset the D-3 bashing that comes from everywhere else in the media and even places like TTAC. Hey there is no doubt in my mind that Chrysler has a shit load of troubles, but SRT-8s aren’t one of them. And everything they do isn’t bad, just as everything GM and Ford do isn’t bad.
“How anyone can conceive of a 300 as a “performance vehicle” is utterly beyond me.”
How can 425 horse power be described if not as performance?
No you wouldn’t see sports car handling, but you would have to spend alot more money to get a big sedan (4200lbs) with this level of power and handling. And a decent ride given the handling and the huge wheels, it is still pretty smooth on the highway.
This is the vehicle that will save Chrysler!
(And the Caliber SRT)
M5 may be a bit quicker, definitely will handle better, but try to comfortably carry a family of four on an extended vacation, ain’t going to happen. We did a long road trip over Christmas with our two kids (late teen), two dogs, and two weeks of luggage. It was by far the most comfortable trip we had ever been on. Plus, the car absolutely loved the sea level cooler air. 30mph and I could blip the throttle and smoke the tires, with an R/T. Imagine an extra 75hp from a SRT. IMO, the Chrysler LX’s are the best all around cars being made today. Maggie with it’s quirky station wagon design, 300 is the old mans luxery cruiser with a performance side, and the Charger being bad to the bone. You’re not going to take a 4200+ lb car and be best at the twisties, or even straight line, but you will have a nicely balanced road car that can have a fun side. There are some absolutely fantastic effective performance enhancing products out there for the cars. You want straight line performance, there’s some people running low 10’s now. You want twisties, a friend is kicking some serious rear with a charger R/T AWD.
Perfect for 1972.
Chrysler does it again.
“Perfect for 1972.
Chrysler does it again.”
It must be perfect for 2009 as even in this poor economic climate they are selling. I doubt that any company in the world is selling more sedans of this power than Chrysler. (And for a nice profit to boot!)
It must be perfect for 2009 as even in this poor economic climate they are selling. I doubt that any company in the world is selling more sedans of this power than Chrysler. (And for a nice profit to boot!)
Freakin’ hilarious.
“Freakin’ hilarious.”
How so?
I don’t get this.Unemployment is soaring..There is no way to argue that. Financing is extremely difficult.The short term forecast is grim. Chrysler is in desperate straits. And they see a 45k Luxo/Performance sedan as a practical vehicle?
I think people need to understand that 2005 is over,and “recovery” will not include McMansions,entitlement,and 45k performance cars.
In the new economy,a sensible Chrysler would fix the Sebring,price it competativly and market it honstly. “A new Chrysler for a new economy”
But no..300’s,Rams..Yep! Thats innovative.Even though I’ve driven an Avenger,I don’t hate Chrysler,but at this point,maybe they need to be done.
Nothing wrong with having a car like this in your portfolio (yes, this coming from an “eco-weenie”). The key word here is “portfolio.” You best have a lot of good stuff on the other end of the spectrum, too. Remember the mantra of the smart investment portfolio. Diversify, diversify, diversify.
LXbuilder: Only your wife gets new? Sorry to hear that.
“LXbuilder: Only your wife gets new? Sorry to hear that.”
I wouldn’t want new for me but the wife always wanted a new convertable and she loves PT Cruisers. So thou I don’t really like it myself she drives at GT PT ragtop.
Most important of all she loves her car, and in 3yrs and @ 62k it has been trouble free so far. Its sure not very refined (not a all really) but she sure can suprise young guys in their “ricers” when the middle aged mom drps the hammer on 230 horses of turbo 2.4 with all the refinement of a farm implement. ( no offence to farm equipment sales people intended)
This is precisely what was being debated as to what 24 “new car models” Chrysler plans to pull out of a hat.
Looks like about 24 new color schemes, a few badly needed interior refurbishments, a new grill here or there, maybe a “sport package layered in, some hood ribs removed and presto, a new line-up!….yawn
Jim Press (Baghdad Bob) was describing how the government auto team loved the new Chrysler Electric cars, when asked how did they like to drive them, his reply was “they didn’t drive them they sat in them, but they were really impressed”. lol
Dealers seldom discount SRT vehicles. 300 sales have been relatively good, considering Chrysler over all. Charger sales are down less then Toyota :) There will always be people that drop a lot of money on cars. For most of us, 45k is ridiculous. For others, it’s a drop in the hat. Chrysler plant that makes Charger/300/Chally is the one closest to running full production out of any of their plants.
Sales on large vehicles tanked big time once gas went above 3.00. At 4.00, you couldn’t find a small car. When gas prices returned back down out of the stratosphere, small cars sales dropped BIG TIME, and large vehicles returned to nearly the same percentage as before. BUT, overall vehicle sales have plummeted.
If you were an executive of any company, do you produce and sell what people buy, or do you produce and sell what small groups of people tell you to buy. Oh, and remember, there are factors influencing your customers decisions today, but you have to plan for four+ years from now.
Massive Horsepower GOOD!!!
cardeveloper…Gas will go back up. I don’t know one single person who would spend 45k on a new car right now,(Maybe I’m just low rent)and right now is when Chrysler needs a hit. I don’t believe that this is a good move for this company at this time,and based on their recent offerings,I have no faith in the marketing team.I’m not preoccupied with other people enough to care what they buy,but as tax dollars are being sunk in to a company guilty of gross mismanagement,I do feel a sense of futility in seing yet another ill advised,theatrical misstep. And I actually like the car itself.But at 45k,with Chryslers rep,possible BK,and overall economic uncertainty,I can’t believe that those in that market wouldn’t chose a Lexus or something along those lines.
LXbuilder:
“Here comes the Chrysler hate, no one that slams this cars performance can honestly say they have driven one and if they have they are either dead inside or an eco-wennie.”
Too true, because everyone here is missing the point of this post, if I may be so bold. Robert is not dissing the 300C SRT8, he is dissing the the Det News review. Robert is a big fan of 300C and 300C SRT8. Robert Farago loves him some SRT8.
“Too true, because everyone here is missing the point of this post, if I may be so bold. Robert is not dissing the 300C SRT8, he is dissing the the Det News review.”
No, that was perfectly clear. I am dissing the Det news guy for considering the 300 a “performance vehicle.”
And I stand by that. Brutish horsepower arrived at through the neanderthal application of huge displacement in a two valve motor that produces specific power of 69 hp per liter is not high performance. Even if you dropped 420 Ferrari horses into that car, I’d still argue it’s not truly, essential high performance because the thing doesn’t work as a system.
Fine if you like having a big, fast sled that goes in one direction I guess. Doesn’t strike my fancy though. YMM.
What about the LS7? Is that a high performance engine? 72.1 hp/L! How pathetic!
Am I doing it right?
Ferrygeist:
“Even if you dropped 420 Ferrari horses into that car, I’d still argue it’s not truly, essential high performance because the thing doesn’t work as a system.”
But haven’t you heard? The 300 is developed from the Mercedes E class. The same chasis. Are you saying that Mercedes doesn’t know how to make something carve corners? /sarcasm.
If you don’t understand the idiom of an American big brute highway cruiser that is crazy fast then there is no use trying to explain it to you. But given that, for the size car it is it takes corners very well, especially when compared to it’s spiritual ancestors from a couple of decades ago.
By the way your hp calcs are off. 69 HP per liter comes to 393, the SRT8 is rated at 425 (it may actually be higher). Close but still. And while you mention the 2 valves per cylinder you neglect to mention the host of other high tech aspects of this engine. If your interested you can find all about it at Alppar.com and Wikipedia.
SRT8 is 425 stock. Doesn’t take a lot to start bumping that into some serious HP.
New platform is a 5 year development program. New sheet metal is a 3 yr development program. This was started three years ago.
Can you absolutely guarantee, are you willing to put cash on the barrelhead that gas will go up? You’re a much better market timer then I’ll ever be then :).
Bitch all you want, the 300 still stands out in a crowd of bubble shape sameness.
I’ve never understood the hp per displacement fascination. A 400HP 6 liter engine is the same as a 400HP 4 liter engine. The only advantage would be if you had a 600HP 6 liter engine
Remember, you should drive a car like this slowly.
chgomatt- the 300C SRT8 will sell to the people who still have enough money to buy a car. Not everyone is poor or wants a car that is practical, or has low depreciation, or is made in Japan or germany, or is “modern”.
Gas prices might go up, yes but in my entire lifetime that I can remember, gasoline has been more affordable than not affordable in the US.
Actually no, a 400 hp 6L engine is a totally different ball game then 400 HP 4L engine. Overlay the torque and HP curves over the top of each other, not even in the same league. With 4L engine, you end up with a narrow power band, with 6L, the power band is much wider. And besides, a 4L 400 HP engine will frequently have some sort of forced induction. Add forced induction to a 6L engine, and you will very quickly be deep into the 500HP approaching 600HP.
I wonder if he realizes that Chrysler’s All-American halo cars are actually made in Canada.
Oh, and so is the Camaro.
Correction
I forgot that the SRT8 is a 6.1 liter motor. So Ferrygeist calculations of 69 hp per liter comes out 420 which is essentially accurate. The rest of my comment still stands.
425 HP is so 2004. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, HP is like a woman’s breast size. Above a certain point the measurement number will certainly get your attention, but more than a mouth full is a wasteful. And very high maintenance.
Give me beloved wife’s true C-cups, and the 280 horses in my Audi A-6, and I’ve got all any real man needs…
LX’s are specifically made in Ontario. That’s just another state… right? LOL
1972-wannabe Chryslers are great for crumbling 1972 vintage roads in the Midwest.
Yes, I’m a mean/snarky person generally.
I’d love to own one of these and I don’t like Chrysler. It has looks that stand the test of time, its safe, has a nice interior without being gimmicky, great stereo, the right wheels, the right size for a family of 4 or 5, and a stupendous amount of power.
A wikked, gentlemanly car to keep for 10 years. I’d wash her by hand every weekend as long as I owned her.
A good sign of a great car is how you explain why you bought it. Some cars require you to justify your purchase by talking about mundane things like mpg, storage or resale value. With this, you could just say, “It’s awesome, wanna go for a ride?”
No one in their right mind would buy a 300C which looks like the other million built 300C for a higher prices tag. Please the 300C is an ugly stupid looking car which has now become a taxi. Everyone who wanted one has bought one. Looks like hopeful Brampton workers are here with their ignorant hope. All three cars built at Brampton are stupid cars with the challenger being really big and ugly.
“No one in their right mind would buy a 300C which looks like the other million built 300C for a higher prices tag. Please the 300C is an ugly stupid looking car which has now become a taxi. Everyone who wanted one has bought one. Looks like hopeful Brampton workers are here with their ignorant hope. All three cars built at Brampton are stupid cars with the challenger being really big and ugly.”
Yeah why buy this when you can cruise all day in a lovely “Camcord” or a little C-class Benz or some other really unique and pretty car.
And Brampton workers aren’t fairing any worse than most autoworkers at present, and better than many. They’ve got next week off just like the Honda Alliston workers.
Oh and by the way Brampton has been building a good sized number of SOLD 6.1 cars over the past few weeks.
And the work force is not ignorant, but yes I guess any positive person could be said to have hope. And so far there has been reason for it.
“No one in their right mind would buy a 300C which looks like the other million built 300C for a higher prices tag. Please the 300C is an ugly stupid looking car which has now become a taxi. Everyone who wanted one has bought one. Looks like hopeful Brampton workers are here with their ignorant hope. All three cars built at Brampton are stupid cars with the challenger being really big and ugly.”
They’re “stupid?” Are you six years old? What kind of reasoning is this? Accords are Taxis, so are Camrys and Siennas and Prius and Crown Victorias. So are Mercedes E and C classes and 3 Series all over the world. The 300 is a stately car and the 300C and SRT8 are even better.
@cardeveloper :
And besides, a 4L 400 HP engine will frequently have some sort of forced induction.
Like BMW’s 4L V8 in the M3, for example? Or like the Ferrari 4.3L? Or like the Audi R8’s 4.2L? Or the Porsche GT3?
I must have missed the turbos on all of those.
Like BMW’s 4L V8 in the M3, for example? Or like the Ferrari 4.3L? Or like the Audi R8’s 4.2L? Or the Porsche GT3?
I must have missed the turbos on all of those..
No but you might have missed the price range a little.
@LXbuilder :
No but you might have missed the price range a little.
So what performance car in the SRT8’s price range has a 4L turbo engine?
Besides:
Chrysler 300C SRT8: 61,290.00 €
BMW M3: 66,000.00 €
(German prices including tax)
Pretty much the same price range.
Besides:
Chrysler 300C SRT8: 61,290.00 €
BMW M3: 66,000.00 €
Sorry I’m in Canada.
BMW M3 $69,900
Porche GT3 $138,100
Audi R8 $139,000
300 SRT8 $52,698 We have winner!