Re: [Chrysler300] NEW 300C from Chrysler!

["Thomas Miller" <tfm@xxxx>]

Allright!!! I'm gonna do it again. Here goes my rant about history
versus the present again. I posted the follwoing about a year and a
half ago and think it's still relevant. As far as the 300C concept
goes, the grille sure as hell looks like the one in my '57 300C!!! The
rest of it looks damned good to me, and'll probably scoot down the road
"real good". But, what do I know, I'm just a 43 yr. old punk kid..... 
<grin>

***** text from my rant of 11/2/2001 12:57:15 AM pasted here *****

All right, I can't stay out of this one any longer.....

I'm 42 years old, and currently own a nice 300C, a 300M that's logged
50,000 miles, an all original 1970 440+6 'Cuda, an '89 Maserati TC, and
a Dodge RAM pickup truck. I've also had the good fortune in the last 27
years to have been in and out all of the following and some more that I
can't seem to remember right now:


'49 Dodge Wayfarer Roadster (D30 Flathead 6)
'62 Imperial Southampton
'62 Dodge Dart 330 (My first car!) (Polyshperical 318)
'64 Ponitac Catalina (389 4 bbl)
'66 Imperial Crown (Originally owned by TV Evangelist Rex
Humbard......)
'67 Chrysler 300 Convertible (440 4bbl.)
'67 Plymouth Fury III convertible (318 2 bbl.)
'68 Dodge Dart GTS (383 4 bbl.)
'68 Pontiac Firebird (326 2bbl.)
'68 Chevrolet Biscayne Station Wagon (307 2bbl.)
'69 Mercury Marauder X100 (429 4bbl.)
'69 Plymouth GTX Convertible (440 4bbl.)
'69 Dodge Charger Daytona (440 4bbl.)
'70 Plymouth Superbird 440+6
'70 Plymouth Sport Fury GT (Distant relative to the Chrysler 300
Hurst)
'70 Plymouth Duster Slant Six
'70 AMC Gremlin (no laughing please)
'70 Plymouth Roadrunner Convertible (a 383 4bbl. in Plum Crazy Purple
no less!) 
'71 DeTomaso Pantera (351Cleveland ZF 5spd)
'71 Plymouth 'Cuda (383 4 bbl. 4 spd.)
'74 Dodge Charger SE (318 2bbl.)
'79 Chrysler Cordoba (a real stripper, but w/ a 360 2bbl.)
'79 Dodge Magnum (360 2bbl.)
'81 Chrysler Imperial (318 f.i.)
'85 Dodge Daytona (2.2l turbocharged)
'85 Chrysler New Yorker 5th Avenue (318 2bbl.)
'87 Shelby Lancer (2.2l intercooled turbocharged)
'87 Chrysler New Yorker 5th Avenue (318 2bbl.)
'88 DeTomaso Pantera GT5s (Nitrous Oxide Injected 351 Cleveland ZF
5spd.)
'94 Dodge RAM Pickup (318 f.i.)
'95 Chrysler LHS (3.5l f.i.)
'96 Dodge RAM Quad Cab Pickup (360 f.i.)
'97 Eagle Vision TSi (3.5l f.i. Autostick)
'01 Chrysler PT Cruiser

Ok, ok, I know it's a long list and it looks like I'm bragging. Well,
I sort of am, but not about the cars. I've been fortunate enough over
the years to have been able to live automotive history practically a
year at a time in some cases. I've thoroughly enjoyed every one of
these cars (yes, even the Gremlin!) I listed them here in chronological
order, not in order of my possession; to point out the amazing
differences you see in cars that are even just 5 years apart. Take the
Dodge Wayfarer for instance. It was a true roadster with pop-out
Plexiglas side curtains, a manual drop top and no back seat. I think
Dodge only sold about 300 of them before they switched to roll up
windows. It was an absolute dog by today's standards. The flat 6 and
fluid drive trans were a horrid combination. But just 6 years later,
the C300 came along. What a different car! Right? I dearly loved the
Imperials I had. The late 60s muscle cars were a blast too. Even the
Charger Daytona and the Plymouth Superbird had their subtle differences
(I owned both of these cars at the same time.... It was fun to compare
and contrast the same aero ideas cropped onto a Roadrunner and a
Charger, sort of the same but still very different!)

Ok, so where am I going with this? Here goes. A '57 300C cost around
$5000.00 new. My 440+6 'Cuda stickered for around $5000.00. The
stripped down '79 Cordoba, yep around $5000. How much did cars change
from '57, to '70 to '79? Loads. In lots of ways. The sheer volume of
automobiles sold in the United States has gone up exponentially from the
"old days" till now. 300C production was less than 3000 cars total. I
think Chrysler sold around 30,000 'Cudas and Challengers in 1970. 
Cordobas in '79? I don't remember but it was a bunch. I think Chrysler
met their goal of selling 160,000 PT Cruisers in the '01 model year. 
(Where the hell did they all go?!) So, the point here, LARGE
differences in the number of cars sold.

The way cars are sold has changed significantly. I remember as a kid
in the small Eastern Ohio town of 5000 that I grew up in, we had a
Ford/Mercury agency, a Dodge agency, a Chevrolet Dealer, and a Chrysler-
Plymouth Dealer. What's the difference? The "agencies" were lucky to
have 10 cars in stock. The "dealers" easily had 30 or 40 cars in stock.
Remember when the new model year always started around September and
the dealer showrooms would be cordoned off with cars covered until
announcement day? It sure isn't like that today is it?!

Ok, so what's my point? The point is, you can't really compare a 300C
to a 300M. They're two different cars, for two different times. I love
'em both. The C puts as much of a grin on my face as the M does. You
also can't compare production numbers from the different eras directly. 
Frankly, I think Chrysler was lucky to unload 3000 300Cs in the '57
model year. To me, that car was sort of a Dodge Viper in its day (both
in price and performance). So, is 8000 M Specials a "limited" run? 
Well, it sure is compared to 160,000 PT Cruisers, and I think in
perspective it's in the same boat as 3000 300Cs when you consider
overall production and how the demand for cars has changed in 45 years. 


I go to the North American International Auto Show in Detroit every
year. In Jan. of '98, my wife and I poked and prodded every large sedan
there was, foreign & domestic. Yes even the Cadillacs and Lincolns,
Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Acura,etc. Hmmm. another point. 
There's a whale of a lot more to choose from these days than there was
back in the 50s. But again, I emphasize, nothing came close to the 300M
in overall room, performance and style in that price range. We bought
the 300M later that year. Is there any other car that comes close to
the M in the $25,000 - $55,000 price range. I can categorically say no.
Nothing touches that car today in that price range. BTW, I'm seeing
2002 300Ms going for around $26,000 here in Columbus Ohio. That's a
bargain in my book. 

By the way Karl, the Jaguar XK8 convertible starts at around $75,000
and goes to about $95,000. (See : 
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2001/jaguar/xkseries/xk82drconvertible40l8cyl5a/prices.html
) It better turn low 14s at that price. Hmmmm..... How much does a
Viper cost? Yeah, there we go. Another winner from the Chrysler camp!
<grin>

All right, the caboose to this train of thought is that cars, people
and our country have drastically changed since World War II. I know I
was just as proud of my 300M the day it came home as the guy who first
brought my 300C home in June of 1957 and the suave debonair dude that
first cruised the streets in that '49 Wayfarer I once had. I know we
all satisfied an urge for something special, with cars that involve sort
of the same spirit, but are three totally different cars for three
totally different times. It was a big moment for me. 

I'm just as proud of my M as I am my C and all of the other cars that I
now and have had the good fortune of owning. Can I pick just one of
them out as my favorite? No. I liked them all for various reasons (and
again YES even the Gremlin!) I don't think we can compare the old with
the new. They're just different! I appreciate them for what they were
in history, and know that I'm making today's history!


***** end of paste ****

OK,

If you 've read this far, you're no doubt ready for my summary to this
mess. DC is in the business to sell cars, profitably. PERIOD. If it's
not profitable, DC won't be in business for long. So, they have to
appeal to the tastes of the masses and hope they buy it. Does DC have
the balls to produce the Chrysler Atlantic ( see
http://www.autotrend.com/9802.html), I doubt it. It wouldn't be
profitable at a price point that would sell. But, let's face it. DC if
a helluva lot further out front these days with things like the
CrossFire, the Pacifica, the return of the Hemispherical engine and rear
wheel drive stuff than Ford or GM in my humble opinion. 

There was some mention somwhere in this thread of the "new" Ford
Thunderbird. Wooha. They're flying off the carlots now aren't they. 
Have you looked at that 45 grand t**d. That's what it really is . All
show, no go, typical crap Ford plasticy interior with a ncely done
exterior and ho hum unnder the hood. It'll probably go the way of the
Lincoln Blackwood in about the same period of time. Why? Because it
won't be PROFITABLE.

The last word of the last paragraph is what it's all about gang. Think
about it.

Best Regards to all,

Thomas F. Miller
300C, 440+6'Cuda, Maserati TC, 300M

( four in a row to go!) I like looking in my garage! <grin>