Re: [Chrysler300] new 300C's and what cars does D-C wish to build/sell???

["christopher beilby" <thelastbestgenius@xxxx>]

With regard to what name Chrysler should use on it's new hemi car - I note 
one detractor says in effect 'get on with your life, it (the 300C) was too 
long ago. A pity he did not indicate what cars he owns, or has owned, what 
300Cs, etc.. May I suggest he and other like minded people let us practice 
our democratic right to say what we think, and those not interested just 
delete us un-read?!

I repeat my previous message's thought - if we had not saved these early 300 
letter cars, D-C would not wish to re-use their names !!??

I purchased my first 300C in Feb 1981, I had to come to America to buy it, 
brought it on a hunch it should be a great drivers car, this apart from it's 
looks.

My first car was a 30 A Ford Roadster, and every car since I have owned to 
drive, my most most normal car a 1972 Lambo Espada, and for 27 years I owned 
perhaps the ultimate fun/road performance car, a 385bhp 1967 AC Cobra Mk III 
(289 hipo motor in coil spring chassis, the best ever Cobra, not the more 
common 'unsafe to push hard' cast iron 427).

I have owned and driven over 100 cars, and some are very memorable because 
they were just so enjoyable to drive compared to others that should have 
been the same. ( An example - the 1937 Buick Century is a brilliant car to 
drive compared to drive to Packard's 120 series 8 cylinder, maybe because 
the Packard steering is too slow, a cheap nasty floor gearchange - who 
knows?! )

I believe when the definitive history of 'cars before 2000' is written, 
there will be three landmark production cars recognised, this because they 
possessed so uncommon looks and performance advances way beyond the rest of 
industry.

Firstly I nominate the Lamborghini Espada - outstanding looks, that 
magnificent V-12, and the world's first mass selling rear engine V-12 - it 
sold in thousands which Ford GT 40 cannot claim. For all it's low looks, you 
can sit in the driver's seat and see and drive so easily.

The second contendor has to be the 1957 300C - most other prduction sedans 
were struggling to do 120mph - a well tuned a C can do 140 mph. Add to this 
anti-dive torsoin bar suspension maybe 10 years before Europe, the ultimate 
form 392 original hemi, and that so unique/outstanding body shape, 
grille,simple but effective interior, etc..

Argue all you like, Chrsyler created a true masterpiece. The 300C owes it's 
place to the 300B and the first 300, this apart from the added bonus that on 
today's radials it is a blast to drive, this so hard to make happen.

What I am leading to, is what sort of cars does Chrysler wish to build ??!! 
Chrysler should not need to try and con people into thinking they are 
buying a piece of history to sell a Chrysler, by re-using the 300C name.

Chrysler has a perhaps equal 'hemi heritage' - the basic design still rules 
the drag strips - 50 years of winning, unrivalled in history for one design 
!!?? Chrysler should shout it's hemi heritage loud and long?

But at the end of it all, if Chrysler is half smart, it should try and BUILD 
NEW DRIVER'S CARS - NEW LEGENDS. They are the cars buyers seek out, need no 
fancy names or advertising.

A more appropriate name for their new car is - the new CHRYSLER HEMI. At 
the worst they could call it the HEMI C. Kids, most all new buyers today, 
do not know what a 300C is, but hey, a hell of a lot more know of the 
'Chrysler Hemi'. The new car is not a 300, never can be close as a 4dr, 
etc., but it is a hemi. Tell them to go with that, plus it will sell a lot 
easier, better. And if it is just 'half a driver's car', maybe the demand 
will grow, and they bring out a coupe/roadster worthy of the 300 logo?!

yours

Aussie Christopher

I b


> From: "L.Andrew Jugle" <lajugle@xxxx>
> To: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Chrysler300] How many years did they build 300C's???......
> Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:37:46 -0000
>
> One half, just like the other 300 letter car limited editions.
>
> For years in the sixties and seventies one would come across DEALERS
> who said the 300's were never built!!! ....because they had never
> seen one. It was the Japanese that inspired cookie cutter
> production of identical cars to cut programming costs. Remember those
> days of advertised $3,000 cars and everyone on the lot was $4,500???
>
> People forget that the early 300's were equivalent to TWO Corvettes
> or THREE T-birds if you loaded the Brute and scammed the plastic toy
> or Bird. ....and the 300 was built to order only, meaning you
> ordered your car and WAITED a few months for it to be built. No
> walking the lots looking for the Parade Green one.
>
> It was a whole different world. A world only RR, Bentley and few
> others can afford.
>
> L.Andrew Jugle, Elmhurst,IL

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to 
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp