Chrysler Imperial one step closer to production
Chrysler may be in the middle of a major ownership change, but the beat goes on when it comes to future vehicle plans. The folks over at The Star are reporting that Chrysler is going to build a fifth model at their Brampton plant in Ontario, which currently assembles the 300, Charger, and Magnum. Challenger production is scheduled for next year, and the fifth vehicle, which could be built in 09' as a 2010 model, is expected to be the Imperial.
Chrysler is reportedly investing $700 million in the Brampton plant to bring the Imperial to life, and the Rolls-Royce and Bentley wannabe is expected to ride on an extended version of Chrysler's LX platform. The Imperial, which sported a 6.1L Hemi V8 as a concept, could also receive a diesel engine. Chrysler has yet to make an announcement on an additional vehicle at Brampton, but word is it that Chrysler Executive Vice President of Manufacturing Frank Ewasyshn is expected to do so June 11.
We aren't sold on the chunky, blocky, copycat looks of the Imperial, but Chrysler apparently thinks enough Americans will want the beast that they've all but pulled the trigger on making it all official
[Source: TheStar]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Ben 9:23AM (5/17/2007)
But...it's ugly...like butt.
Reply
DAVID 9:25AM (5/17/2007)
Thats what I said!
Reply
Mike 9:25AM (5/17/2007)
Take something with the size and sawgger of the Imperial, add more than a dash of looks from the Nassau....
Reply
Mike 9:25AM (5/17/2007)
Take something with the size and sawgger of the Imperial, add more than a dash of looks from the Nassau....
Reply
Big one 9:26AM (5/17/2007)
Why are they building that thing?
Reply
Ron 9:30AM (5/17/2007)
I'm not crazy about it. Where I live in Ohio, the lots already have unsold 300s sitting for long stretches of time. Why add another model that's likely to be a slow mover?
Reply
Big Mike Wood 9:37AM (5/17/2007)
This will be a huge hit for Chrysler, make no mistake. Maybe as big of a hit as the 300. The styling is definitely polarizing but that's better than shooting down the middle and churning out an Impala or Five Hundred/Taurus. For those that like it, they will love it.
Reply
mossad513 9:42AM (5/17/2007)
Anyone else get the feeling this thing is going to be massivly popular with rappers?
Reply
Viv 9:42AM (5/17/2007)
An uglier looking 300. Another mistake from Chrysler.
Reply
el indiano 9:46AM (5/17/2007)
wow, you actually have something there that is uglier than the 300.
when will the big 3 ever understand that chrome does not equal luxury.
Reply
I used to buy only Chrysler 10:00AM (5/17/2007)
While 300 was a hit, I do not foresee the same with the Imperial.
Firstly, its styling. It hints its desire to run with the big boys, Rolls and Bentley, at 1/5-1/10 of the price. At the end, it will be welcomed like those $10 Rolex - a phony no-good pretender.
Secondly, its name. Commander, Imperial - Chrysler makes such loud statements with no substance behind them. Rolls can be Imperial, or Maybach, but not Chrysler.
Reply
jgp 9:52AM (5/17/2007)
Meh.
CWW did a _wonderful_ Imperial photochop a while back that I would love to see go into production.
http://www.cwwcardesign.com/cars/imperial.html
That thing has _presence_.
Reply
Ted 9:53AM (5/17/2007)
Damn thing looks like a bigger, uglier, 300C.
This car has the same problem the VW Phaeton has. Anyone with money will not buy a Chrysler, just like they didn't buy the Phaeton.
-ted
Reply
riverhead 9:57AM (5/17/2007)
I'm not a big fan of this concept ... won't it poach 300 sales which are already slow? But, this is a ballsy move at a time when other American automakers (Ford) would get too conservative. Cadillac is working on a halo car, why not Chrysler? I hope that they do something special with the engine instead of just another Hemi.
Reply
Steven T. 9:58AM (5/17/2007)
Two mistakes here:
1) That today the Chrysler brand can be any more competitive with a luxury car than it was with the original Imperial.
2) That the styling of the concept will have the "legs" of the PT Cruiser.
I can see why they want to offer a full-sized car with more interior room. This, however, doesn't seem to be the right way to go about it. Beyond that, I hope the scarce resources invested into the Imperial do not take away from the promptly updating the 300/Magnum/Charger. They are starting to look a little dated. Styling exercises need to be refreshed more quickly than cars people buy primarily for practical reasons (re: Camry).
Reply
Mike 10:01AM (5/17/2007)
"Anyone with money will not buy a Chrysler, just like they didn't buy the Phaeton."
People say the same thing about Cadillac.
I would be very, very surprised if by 2010 the LY platform turn out large rwd vehicles tht look like a bloated 300, rather than an evolution of the design as previewed in the Nassau.
Reply
DuckFat 10:07AM (5/17/2007)
Well... I kinda like it. It's sure a step away from cookie-cutter car design and there are people that want a pure luxury car like this.
Reply
Tom 10:29AM (5/17/2007)
UGH! the 300 was a blatant rip of the Bentley Azure and this has always been recognized as a blatant rip of the Phantom.
Whoever's stupid enough to put this into production and kill off any possible remaining respect for this brand that may be hanging by a thread...I hope such execs hang.
Reply
Brad 10:30AM (5/17/2007)
I've never liked the looks of this thing. 300 is a beautiful car but the Imperial is hideous. I don't know why they think they need a car higher in price than the 300.
Chrysler needs to build volume in the lower price ranges.
Reply
Ken 10:31AM (5/17/2007)
For the bling bling bunch, this would be great! Specially those who wants a RR knockoff and can not afford a real one. By the way, gas is already over $4 in San Francisco, anyone can't afford a real RR can't afford the gas even if they could buy a knockoff if it's a V8. Personally, I don't mind the style, I think it's much better than 300, but making another huge car when the gas price is going through the roof is not a good move, then again I could be wrong. Maybe there would be enough bling bling buyers to keep this thing profitable.
Reply