BrewSwillis

How can they have a "solid quality rep"? They have really only been around for like 15 years, and for about 10 of those years they have been building total crap!

As of December 2006 and according to the US Census, the ten largest trading partners of the United States represented roughly two thirds of imports and exports. The largest partners with their total trade in billions of US Dollars are as follows: * Canada: $533.67 * China: $343.00 * Mexico: $332.43 * Japan: $207.74 * Germany: $130.39 * United Kingdom: $98.83 * South Korea: $78.29 * Taiwan: $61.24 * France: $61.37 * Singapore: $42.46 http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/ds...12/balance.html ---- Doesn't look like any oil producing countries are even on there.

It won't be called Hyundai. It will have some luxurious American sounding name like Lexiniti, and stupid consumers won't even know who makes it.

I'm with you. The jellybeans were innovative and fine in the 90's, but it was definitely time for a change! And the 300, and other new angular cars are a 180 from that styling.

From Edmunds: There are mechanical updates, too. Dodge is especially proud of the new independent front suspension and steering system and justifiably so: It's as precise and compliant as any big truck we've driven. Four-wheel-drive models still use a conventional live axle in front and it's executed quite well, too. Even the stiffest-sprung model has a surprisingly tolerable ride. It's clear the Dodge suspension engineers really sweated the compromise between drivability, comfort and utility, and they've hit the target. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...rticleId=107242 From Truck Trend: On the road, both the two- and four-wheel-drive Mega Cabs handle surprisingly well. The ride quality also was quite good on 2500 models, but the 3500's heavy-duty underpinnings cause a slightly rougher ride. http://trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup/163...b/interior.html ------ In a 2006 TruckTrend comparison, the Ram won for best interior (tied with the F-150): Most approved of the Ram's interior makeover, although it wasn't in dire need of an update. The symmetrical layout allows a better nav screen and has plenty of storage areas that are all lined so nothing rattles. There's a massive console assembly in between and a lot of high-gloss wood-like plastic trim. The front seats received good ratings, while the back was called claustrophobic and the metal cargo tray under the back seat was deemed clever. New, laminated front-side windows quell some wind noise from the nice big mirrors, though we miss the stereo controls on the back of the steering-wheel spokes. http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...n/interior.html

Toyota is expected to be selling 500,000 Camries every year starting in 2007. That's a half a million Camries every year. That will make things eneven pretty quick, compared to that one time sale of 767's. http://car-reviews.automobile.com/news/toy...-per-year/1760/

Probably $50K or less for a car that's looks as expensive as a Rolls but cheaper than a Caddy? Yeah, I'm sure people will buy it.

The 3.5L V6 Charger is basically spot on with the Impala and CVPI in acceleration. The V6 Charger has better braking than the Impala and CVPI. The Impala matches the Charger in MPG, and the CVPI is slightly worse. The Impala is FWD though, and while the Charger is RWD, it is equipped with ESP (stability control), which I don't think is offered on the CVPI. The HEMI Charger Pursuit blows all away. http://www.allpar.com/squads/police-cars/c...ce-testing.html

No, I think it's a big ass?? Don't tell her I said that!

Well, an Aurora was priced at about $35K, in 2000....which would equate to how much now?? A current (seven years later) 300C (with almost 100 more horsepower) only costs $35K. The Aurora's interior was made of higher quality materials than even GM is using today (save for maybe Cadillac). The Aurora was an expensive car meant to compete with expensive European makes: That same Aurora would easily cost over $40K today. It's really an apples to oranges comparison.

Dude, there is something wrong with you. Overall interior quality can, and does, include design. I was saying that an interior being curvy and round, doesn't automatically make it better than a blockier one. You are strictly equating the word "quality" with a material's properties, and that's fine....but I was using it in the more broad sense of describing it's overall "goodness", or quality, if you may. I own a 2005 300 Touring, and have owned many Chryslers in the past. The actual material quality is very good on my 300. However, the same can't be said of the interior materials quality of many other current Chrysler vehicles, of which many have an abundance of "hard plastic". The only areas on my 300 Touring that I would like to see an improvement, would be to have more different materials or more contrast on the door panels, and maybe another contrasting material incorporated into the passenger side front dashboard. All of the surfaces above the knees, on the 300, are "soft touch" materials. I made it a point to check out many manufacturers interiors when I was at the auto show last year (January 2006). The 300's interior materials quality certainly wasn't any worse then the interiors of the current Chevy/Buick/Pontiac's, Ford's, and even the new Camry (which had lots of hard plastic). I am, however, not much of an interior snob, and prefer to value a car on it's exterior design, and mechanicals. I can't stand all the arguing that goes on in this place about "hard plastic", on any manufacturers vehicles. Even if the 300 Touring had a worse interior, I still may have bought it based on it being RWD, and having a 250 HP V6. On what other new vehicle can I get those two attributes for $27K?

You would also have to factor in Toyota's, Honda's, other Japanese and Korean's grossly increased market share, to compare older vehicle sales to current vehicle sales. How do old Taurus sales compare to new 500/Taurus sales? That the 300 is beating it's older models in sales, speaks volumes for it's consumer appeal. There were nowhere near as many choices in the early 90's.

You can't equate roundness to quality.......well, maybe you can.....but I prefer the look of the blockier interior to match the blockier exterior. The 300 would look really stupid with a interior that looks like it's filled with bubbles (as most 90's interiors do), and an exterior that looks like a bank vault. All that round stuff makes me want to throw up! I'm glad the 90's vehicle look is mostly gone. Just look at the sales of the 300 to see if the buying public likes the new interior.

Wow, this post is hilarious. You know absolutely nothing about Chrysler vehicles. The new Dodge crossover is not "Sebring based". If anything, it's Avenger based......but really, the whole platform is based on a stretched Caliber/Compass/Patriot (GS) platform(that was originally shared with Mitsubishi, and then tweaked). Here's a quote from Allpar about it's size: The Pacifica was considered to have adequate power when it first came out with a 250 horsepower (250 lb-ft of torque) 3.5L V6, and a four speed automatic transmission. It is considered to have a very luxurious and upscale interior (read any review), and the best interior of any current Chrysler. The updated Pacifica now has a 4.0L V6 with 255 horspower, but now with 265 lb-ft of torque, and a six speed transmission......upgrading the Pacifica from adequately powered, to downright quick. I don't know where you got your information from about the sizes of the Compass and Patriot.....but, yet again, you are completely wrong: Compass: Length - 173.4" Width - 69.3" Height - 64.2" Patriot: Length - 173.7" Width - 69.1" Height - 64.4" As you can see, the Patriot and Compass are virtually identical in size.

They say they are going to fix the interiors.....and everybody still complains. Typical.

I suddenly have a taste for oranges? Where'd they paint this thing?.....Maaco or Earl Scheib?

How old are you?? If 18+ Click here: http://yp.yahoo.com/py/ypResults.py?&&...amp;stx=8120393 (there is nothing offensive in the link.....it's just a Yahoo Yellow Pages result )

This rumor is all the UAW needs to go on: The article you linked shows the extents that Toyota will go to, to keep the UAW out. It is kinda shady that they compared the whole UAW (which includes lower paying suppliers, and not just Big 3 plants) to just one of Toyota's plants. I'm sure the whole point loses merit, if you were to compare all of Toyota's plants to say all of GM's plants.

They are making billions upon billions of dollars every quarter....and they are talking about cutting wages. That alone should make the workers want to unionize. The Big 3 are paying their workers more or the same, and they are losing billions. Why shouldn't Toyota be paying the people that are making the cars more, because of all the profits they are creating?? That's what the UAW will be asking the Toyota employees.

Well, if you equate the Pudgeline to a car, then I guess the whole flat tire thing would be the same. But....if I had a "truck", I might want to put heavy things or bulky things into the bed. Imagine having a load of wood chips (assuming the Pudgeline is rated to haul wood chips?) in the bed of your Pudgeline, and then getting a flat tire......oops!! Now imagine the trunk of your car filled with wood chips........well, if you get that far, you deserve to have problems changing your tire....and you may also be retarded.

Wow, Toyota's cockiness knows no bounds.....and hopefully, this will be their eventual downfall:

Some guy on the Allpar.com forums just posted about the surprise he got from his rental car agency......a Charger R/T. A 340 hp V8 from a rental car agency! I wouldn't complain about that. Last few times I rented, I got a Kia minivan (needed to haul samples), a Chevy Silverado (they didn't have any "cars"), and a 4x4 Jeep Liberty (my car was getting a door scratch fixed). I used to get crap like Neons and Ions.

The Avenger is the replacement to the Stratus, not the Intrepid. The Intrepid replacement is the Charger.....which is selling very well. That Stratus was never a huge seller either. The Asians have this market locked for now. The Avenger is trying to compete on styling and price. They could have spent a whole bunch more money on the interior, charged alot more for the car, and people would still buy Camcords over it, due to perceptions and Consumers Reports. Why should they waste their money??