Chrysler 300 much more expensive then thought
03-30-2005, 10:44 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Chrysler 300 much more expensive then thought
I went to my local Chyrsler dealer just to see what I missed by not getting the 300c. I must admit that chrysler has done a very good job and even though I love my car the chrysler is much more luxury while GXP is pure sports.
Anyway they wanted $39,000 for a 3.5 awd 300 and $40,000 for a 300c 5.7 so its not that much of a deal. Did they raise prices for 2005?
Anyway they wanted $39,000 for a 3.5 awd 300 and $40,000 for a 300c 5.7 so its not that much of a deal. Did they raise prices for 2005?
03-31-2005, 09:40 AM
#4
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by willwren
I think even the GXP is way overpriced for what it is. In many ways, it'* a step back from previous Bonneville models.
You bet it is! Especially when GM once ruled supreme in resale, unfortunately that "train" left the station... Honda & Toyota rule now in overall resale.
03-31-2005, 09:43 AM
#5
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Just the simple things that the Bonneville was KNOWN for. Comparing seats, they go steadily downhill with every generation. 92-99 seats were the best seats on the market, bar none. The GXP I drove was seriously lacking. I'd be getting some 99 seats re-covered if I had a GXP. I was sliding all over that seat.
03-31-2005, 10:56 AM
#6
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by willwren
Just the simple things that the Bonneville was KNOWN for. Comparing seats, they go steadily downhill with every generation. 92-99 seats were the best seats on the market, bar none. The GXP I drove was seriously lacking. I'd be getting some 99 seats re-covered if I had a GXP. I was sliding all over that seat.
Forgive the topic sway, the 87-91 Bonneville'* had better seats than the 92-99, IMO, this GXP'* is great for me, I'm 6 foot 3 and I can fit in it! I had a 1994 SSEi new and the seats were difficult for me as the travel wasn't far enough back, so I bought an Eldorado instead in 1995 as the seats in that could accomodate me!
03-31-2005, 01:30 PM
#7
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Posts: 7,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 3c hemi is MUCH faster than any stock ssei... heck, the new srt8 runs the 1/4 a tick quicker than an ls2 goat and is only another tick slower than the sts-v: for an as tested price of roughly 43,500. ill have one in 30 years (when i can finally afford it)
03-31-2005, 01:45 PM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yeah the hemi is quick but it should be for the size. 300c is a brand new design while the GXP is some years older. Just too many 300c around with chromes and tints they all look alike but the stand out. No one person takes a double take at a GXP unless they are a pontiac person in the know.
Btw. why didnt GXPs get the SSEi headrests?
Btw. why didnt GXPs get the SSEi headrests?
04-14-2005, 01:25 PM
#9
Junior Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago,illinois
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Question . The concept car did have SSEi Headrests and floormats. But in any case, it'* somewhat unfair to compare the GXP and the 300c. The latter is a brand-new car on a rear-drive platform versus a Bonneville that'* been out since 2000 based on a front-drive structure. In 2000, the ONLY midsize-fullsize sedans with more than 200 horsepower that wasn't from Europe was the 300M, the Bonneville and the Grand Prix. And what did Chrysler have in its powertrain stack? A pretty heavy 300M with a putrid 3.5L 250 v6 ! So don't get so down on the Bonnie. I still think the GXP is still a better-than-average car, given what GM had to work with. 
