Today I Parked
12-26-2005, 04:29 PM
#1
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Today I Parked
next to a 1999-2003 300M and noticed my rims were a bit smaller. Aren't bigger rims bad for performance? No wonder those 252hp 3.5 24V'* can't perform worth sh*t. 
12-26-2005, 04:38 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Two Words...
Chrysler Transmission
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
Chrysler Transmission
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
12-26-2005, 04:46 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by fantastic88
Thats right. We have a, what 20% loss, they have a 24% loss.
And I have seen too many of the 2.7'* let go.... Makes all of the Ford Vulcan 3.0'* look like a diamond in the rough
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
12-26-2005, 04:51 PM
#5
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
And I have seen too many of the 2.7'* let go..
12-26-2005, 06:14 PM
#8
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want an idea just how bad the A606 trans in the LX bodies are, look for a 300M-Special. They had a beefed up 3.5L, at about 275hp, and the SSEi with 240hp is still faster.
It'* a shame because the 3.2/3.5 motors were terrific powerplants.
It was the older 2.7/3.3 engines in the first-gen Intrepids that were such crap.
It'* a shame because the 3.2/3.5 motors were terrific powerplants.
It was the older 2.7/3.3 engines in the first-gen Intrepids that were such crap.
12-26-2005, 06:21 PM
#10
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Thread Starter
Mmmmmm, yaesaaaaaaa... Eat it 340hp POS. Eat my rockers, exaust, intake, plugs, and asll elase. Rockers are top end mods, WHAT? CHRYSLER?