The Challenger I heard was going to be a limited production run or something like that. No manual transmission either... kinda sucks on both accounts but maybe if it sells like hotcakes they'll extend its production.

Where is the Lexus plant? ;)

If they built cars that looked like a Benz and had Chrysler quality, I could be assured that any sort of wiring harness wouldn't fall apart after a few years and eat up a few components along the way. And if they still build the 727 Torqueflite, then I wouldn't have to worry that my 722.366 is going to self destruct in the next year or two.

However, they had best not use Chryslers old electronic instrument cluster, nor their conv. tops, nor their steering columns...they failed on my (some more than once) before the odo reached 30k.
It is for those reasons, that I haven't considered a Chrysler in the last 16 years; and it may take a few more years, before I think about it again somewhat seriously. (The fact that I am even considering thinking about it, is only because of the strides that chrysler has made in the past few years.)

The Mercedes ML-series is built in Alabama. No offense to anyone here who owns one.... but they are pretty much pieces of junk.

Mike

Exactly.;)

[. I didn't know Japan was building MBs here in the US]

good one!

tom w

Tom,

I wish DCX, would have bought Citroen, and evolved the DS series. They hold a fascination that I have had since I first saw them. I feel the same about the first series Jaguar XK-E, circa 1961.

I think the DS series was so far ahead intellectually and practicality and advanced engineering, but it looked like it came from MARS! But it RUSTED better than a FIAT or Karmann Ghia, in Michigan's Winter Environment. The Karosserie was weak. :D Sacre bleu, it is not to be.:disappoin

of course the newest benz i have owned is my 90 350sdl......

my wife's pt cruiser is pretty junky, but good god she loves it. i had to do the head gasket at 40k. i hear all the neons and pts need that.

but my 03 dodge truck with cummins has been about perfect with now 52k on it and at least 1/3 of that towing. two warrenty visits for the seeping plugs on the head, one leaky tire, and possibly an ac problem intermittant icing of the evap. excellent power mileage and the brakes are all original still and the front tires are still factory. i replaced one rear and put up the spare at about 45k.

but the new benzes arent as bad as a k car, in any way, are they?

tom w

They are junk. Not only built in Alabama, many parts are sourced from Mexico. Let me tell you, having to spend a few hundred $$$ to change the fuel filter because the OEM filter was updated and three new fuel lines were needed didn't make me very happy. I won't buy another German vehicle. I won't spend my hard earned cabbage on junk.

Style
 

I think Chrysler is the leader in American Style at present. And that's because of fairly heavy "retro" in their products. Of course where American manufacturers have the jump on Jappanese ones is that they actually have a styling history that they can look back on for inspiration. The Jappanese have never managed to build a visually appealing car in my opinion until possibly some of their current high end vehicles. Historically they simply copied Europe and the USA and/or designed variations on an egg. Chrysler actually "has" a 300 in its history to look back on as Ford has a Mustang. What does Toyota have? or Honda?

As far as Mercedes is concerned. Is it true that their styling department is now in Japan? I think the 2007 S Class is a disgusting amalgam of a Nissan Altima with Ford Focus fenders. For me the biggest problem with Mercedes is the pronounced wedge shape resulting in small unimpressive grills that have largely lost their visual heritage from the cars of the 60's etc. They have no presence. Contrast that with the large and visually impressive grill of the Chrysler 300 which I think visually has more presence than the E-Class.

Just my opinion of course.

- Peter.

It's not just German cars, it's all of them.

After my recent 240D purchase, an older guy I work with got to talking about the 190D he had, year not remembered exactly, but he thinks it was about a '60. He remarked that they, and all other cars, seem to get a little cheesier every year. I think he's right. We can blame the EPA and NTSB for some of that, but for the most part, I think the average American new car buyer is to blame. Maintainability, repairabilty, and long-term cost of ownership are at the bottom of the list (if thought of at all) in the new-car buyer's mind. They want something flashy with lots of gadgets that will get them through 2 to 5 years before they trade it in for the next gimmick. If the typical new car buyer was looking for something to buy new and keep for 20 years or more, we'd be seeing a lot more robust, well-built cars with less electronic gizmos.

After realizing that they tend to keep vehicles for 20 or 30 years, the military is catching on. A few months ago, I heard a Marine Colonel talk about design for disassembly as if it were a new concept. I've been kvetching about that since I got my first car in 1994.

I feel the same about the first series Jaguar XK-E, circa 1961.

I think the DS series was so far ahead intellectually and practicality and advanced engineering, but it looked like it came from MARS!

yeah, i have always had a weak spot for those old ds's too. i remember following one in france back in the seventies on a bumpy curvy road. it just floated over everything and kept on going. and the styling was pretty advanced. it still looks sleek after 50 years.

and that guy who couldnt remember the year of his "great 190" also has forgotten too a lot of the junky parts they contained. like a solex carburator. the interior was very good, and the suspension worked really well as long as the king pins and bushings didnt sieze up. but the 123s and 126s probably were the tops in quality that i have observed. 90 is the newest i have owned.