Author Topic: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010  (Read 14931 times)

Offline Autos_Editor

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
  • Carma: +91/-560
  • member
    • View Profile
Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« on: March 10, 2011, 03:05:05 am »


Though rated 'average to below-average' by Consumer Reports, 'few of the Chrysler 300's problems are major in nature,' says Chris Chase.

Read More...

Offline Ontariodriver

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2577
  • Carma: +39/-240
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2011, 06:11:24 am »
Quote
At first glance though, the 300′s biggest drawing card was its ostentatious styling, with a huge grille and chunky styling that brought to mind a Bentley or Rolls-Royce more than an upscale domestic family car.

The design was more a nod to a Rover P5. I really like these 300's But I won't touch one with a barge poll even if it was someone else's.



Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2011, 08:20:28 am »
Clipping along at up to 5000 km a month and loving mine. Supremely comfortable. The Hemi is about the sweetest engine I have ever driven.

A car just overflowing with character and a pleasure to drive every day. Test drove a lot of cars before I bought it, and have never regretted my choice.

Gas mileage? best ever highway run was 7.6/100, with an average city/highway mix coming in at 11-12. Worst I ever saw, after a bunch of enthusiastic driving was around 18. More than decent for the size of the car. Driven gently, which I rarely do, the gas mileage is impressive.
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." - Sir William Lyons

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2011, 08:34:35 am »
To clarify a few things that Chris didn't mention....

2008 saw a comprehensive overhaul of the interior also, with many more soft touch materials. Interior quality was still somewhat uninspiring.

The 2009 engine upgrade did more than just bump up horsepower. It added variable cam timing and upgraded the way that the cylinder deactivation worked. The horsepower bump was just one aspect of the upgrade (and there are many rumours of it being under-rated at 360 hp). More importantly the torque curve became incredibly flat. Just tons of torque everywhere, and it pulled harder all through the range. It is noticeably stronger than the earlier versions. Also paid big dividends in real world mileage. The cylinder deactivation works well enough now to operate at any reasonable highway speed.

The average rating is for the V8. The 2.7 V6, which I don't think Chris mentioned (and is better forgotten) got the below average rating. Serves people right for getting overly small engine! :)
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 09:03:06 am by Erik »

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2011, 08:35:23 am »
Quote
At first glance though, the 300′s biggest drawing card was its ostentatious styling, with a huge grille and chunky styling that brought to mind a Bentley or Rolls-Royce more than an upscale domestic family car.

The design was more a nod to a Rover P5. I really like these 300's But I won't touch one with a barge poll even if it was someone else's.




Of all the cars I have heard it compared to, I have never heard anyone say a Rover P5....

Offline Mike

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 5323
  • Carma: +172/-99
  • Gender: Male
  • Lurker
    • View Profile
  • Cars: A Beater and an Ascent
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2011, 08:42:42 am »
yeah, it was a nod to the old Chrysler 'Letter Cars' of the 50's and 60's.  Especially the 300C


Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3646
  • Carma: +43/-165
  • Gender: Male
  • Carbon fibre > Soft touch dash material
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2011, 09:18:30 am »
.....
The 2009 engine upgrade did more than just bump up horsepower. It added variable cam timing and upgraded the way that the cylinder deactivation worked.
.....

My independent mechanic and I were talking Chargers the other day when he was looking at the P5.  He stated ChryCo's cylinder deactivation was being disabled by dealers when the cars were being brought in for service as they have seen evidence of pre-mature wear.

Thoughts Erik?

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2011, 09:20:16 am »
.....
The 2009 engine upgrade did more than just bump up horsepower. It added variable cam timing and upgraded the way that the cylinder deactivation worked.
.....

My independent mechanic and I were talking Chargers the other day when he was looking at the P5.  He stated ChryCo's cylinder deactivation was being disabled by dealers when the cars were being brought in for service as they have seen evidence of pre-mature wear.

Thoughts Erik?

I am on all the LX forums, and have never seen this mentioned anywhere. In fact, I remember it being mentioned that in hundreds of thousands of miles of use, no difference in wear was noticed. I call BS on it.

Offline huota

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2009
  • Carma: +49/-60
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2011, 09:56:34 am »
.....
The 2009 engine upgrade did more than just bump up horsepower. It added variable cam timing and upgraded the way that the cylinder deactivation worked.
.....

My independent mechanic and I were talking Chargers the other day when he was looking at the P5.  He stated ChryCo's cylinder deactivation was being disabled by dealers when the cars were being brought in for service as they have seen evidence of pre-mature wear.

Just wondering how they would ever spot the "premature wear" during regular service? Is it part of the procedure to disassemble the whole engine or what...
Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 33318
  • Carma: +758/-938
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2009 Toyota Corolla, 2004 Toyota Highlander V-6 4WD, 2001 Subaru Forester, 1994 Mazda Miata
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2011, 10:18:40 am »
Is it an OHC engine?  You could pull a valve cover and look at cam lobes.  You could pull a spark plug and use a scope to look at cylinder walls.  Not all that accurate and a lot of work for little information.  Compression or leakdown tests?

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2011, 10:19:20 am »
Nope! One camshaft in the middle of the block.


Some info on how it all works:

Displacement on demand
The 2005 Chrysler 300C and Dodge Magnum RT were the first high-volume, modern production vehicles in North America to feature fully-functioning cylinder deactivation. The MDS (“multiple displacement system”) seamlessly alternated between fuel economy in four-cylinder mode, and power in V-8 mode. Owners receive the powerful benefit of the Hemi engine with the fuel economy that they would expect from a smaller engine.

Bob Lee, Powertrain Product Team vice president, said, "The MDS was part of the engine's original design. This resulted in a cylinder-deactivation system that is elegantly simple and completely integrated into the engine design. The benefits are fewer parts, maximum reliability and lower cost."

This system triumphs because of modern electronic controls and electronic throttle control. The HEMI can transition from eight cylinders to four in 0.04 seconds. The system works by cutting out the valve lifters, keeping the valves in four cylinders closed; energy is not lost by pumping air through them.

   
Fuel economy goes up by up to 20% percent under various driving conditions, with a 10% aggregate improvement. Because (as with the slant six) oil comes through the pushrods, lubrication is maintained when cylinders are at rest.

Bob Sheaves discussed why the system is almost always used on V8s and not V6s:
"An Otto cycle engine requires two full revolutions of the crankshaft to fire all the cylinders. Two revolutions x 360 degrees equals 720 degrees of rotation. Dividing that total rotation by the number of cylinders to have an even firing engine (naturally balanced) will give you 120 degrees, which means that you have a cylinder firing every 120 degrees of rotation. When you take out 3 of the cylinders, you have increased the firing rotation to 240 degreees (720/3), still balanced between each firing of a cylinder. The catch is that you have increased the harmonic vibrations as the rpms increase. Deactivation of four cylinders in a V6 would mean losing the multiple of six cylinders, which intrinsically keeps the engine in primary balance. (The lack of natural balance is why balance shafts are often used in 90 degree V6s and larger inline 4 cylinder engines.)"

Chrysler engineer Cole wrote: "The modern Hemi always shuts off the same four cylinders. In our duarability test cycle (150,000 customer equivelant miles driven at the 95th percentile, meaning that only 5 percent of our owners are more abusive than our testing), we have not found any adverse wear patterns." Even in 2010, five years later, there have been no reports of problematic uneven wear.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 10:43:42 am by Erik »

Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3646
  • Carma: +43/-165
  • Gender: Male
  • Carbon fibre > Soft touch dash material
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2011, 02:11:56 pm »
.....meaning that only 5 percent of our owners are more abusive than our testing), we have not found any adverse wear patterns." Even in 2010, five years later, there have been no reports of problematic uneven wear.

Well, he hasn't seen your car then!   ;D

Nice sig BTW...

Offline Erik

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3949
  • Carma: +60/-374
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2000 Honda Insight
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2011, 04:17:16 pm »
.....meaning that only 5 percent of our owners are more abusive than our testing), we have not found any adverse wear patterns." Even in 2010, five years later, there have been no reports of problematic uneven wear.

Well, he hasn't seen your car then!   ;D

Nice sig BTW...

Well, I should have no wear problems, as the MDS system is never engaged in my car. :)

Thanks!
Seemed an interesting quote to me. Just keep in mind we are not allowed to say anything positive about his achievements and we must keep dwelling on any failures he may have had. :)
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 04:18:49 pm by Erik »

CatsEye68

  • Guest
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2011, 06:07:30 pm »
I had occasion to drive an '300 Touring AWD for a while, equipped with the 3.5 V-6. I loved it. Even though the interior seemed a bit low-buck for the class (and this was not the bottom of the line model either), the drive was superior. Scads of room inside, which you paid for with the large exterior bulk. This one was black inside (which it seems about 90% are) and even with the sunroof, it looked gloomy in there.

The only thing I personally dislike about them is that the styling seems not to wear well. I see a lot of these on the road these days and the look does not impress me now. The standard grill is part of the problem and you see a lot with aftermarket items installed there, but even those do not see to make a whole lot of difference. I don't think the design has aged well.

During the depths of Chrysler's woes a couple of years ago these were a screamin' deal on the lots. Dealers were practically giving them away. I almost bought one but decided it was a bit big.

Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3646
  • Carma: +43/-165
  • Gender: Male
  • Carbon fibre > Soft touch dash material
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #14 on: March 10, 2011, 09:43:13 pm »
....
The only thing I personally dislike about them is that the styling seems not to wear well. I see a lot of these on the road these days and the look does not impress me now.
.....

They are quite common, that's the one disadvantage to them.  I think the styling has worn rather well actually...kinda surprised by that.

I recall the designer (Raph Gilles IIRC) made a big deal about the small windows, and how that gave a sense of security to people.  We saw the same idea in the Audi TT and the 350Z.

Offline rrocket

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 76213
  • Carma: +1254/-7214
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2011, 09:51:30 pm »



Nice sig BTW...

I told him to use this one, but he wouldn't:  “Bankruptcy is totally out of the question. We have never contemplated it.”  Bob Lutz
How fast is my 911?  Supras sh*t on on me all the time...in reverse..with blown turbos  :( ...

vdk

  • Guest
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2011, 09:57:51 pm »
The Saga continues!

Offline Triple Bob

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18139
  • Carma: +308/-574
  • Gender: Male
  • Profesional Dash Stroker
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Tundra, GTI, Triumph Tiger, KTM, C63 AMG, FZ-09, Triumph Speed Triple, VW Golf Wagon TDI, BMW 535i, Honda CRF250L, Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Mitsubishi Outlander, Lotus Exige, Subaru Impreza, Peugeot 106, BMW Z4, Toyota MR2 MKIII, Ford Sierra Sapphire
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2011, 11:56:07 pm »
....
The only thing I personally dislike about them is that the styling seems not to wear well. I see a lot of these on the road these days and the look does not impress me now.
.....

They are quite common, that's the one disadvantage to them. 

Funny you should say that.  I was over in a different building today and noticed in the huge car park about one in every fifteen cars was a 300C!


Choosing a car based on reliability is like choosing a wife based solely because she is punctual. There is more to it than that...

Offline Ontariodriver

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2577
  • Carma: +39/-240
    • View Profile
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2011, 06:23:33 am »
Of all the cars I have heard it compared to, I have never heard anyone say a Rover P5....

Well it's fact. The 300C was Inspire by the designer using a Rover P5. If you look you can see P5 in the 300C..

yeah, it was a nod to the old Chrysler 'Letter Cars' of the 50's and 60's.  Especially the 300C

Yes correct but not by looks Just the letters..

Offline dirtyjeffer

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 17120
  • Carma: +296/-1312
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2021 Toyota Venza Limited, 2016 Kia Sorento EX AWD
Re: Used Vehicle Review: Chrysler 300, 2005-2010
« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2011, 02:36:07 pm »
Funny you should say that.  I was over in a different building today and noticed in the huge car park about one in every fifteen cars was a 300C!
where were you, a Hyundai dealership? :rofl2:
When you've lost the argument, admit defeat and hit the smite button.