Chrysler 300/Charger facelift due in 2011, RWD sticking around
While new fuel economy regs have put the General's rear-wheel-drive offerings into a holding pattern (we think), Chrysler will soldier on with its RWD LX platform into the next decade. According to The Car Connection, Chrysler plans to makeover the 300 and Charger in 2011, but the reason the Pentastar people are keeping it rear-wheel-drive isn't to sate the public's lust for FR cars, rather there's no budget to develop a new front-wheel-drive platform.
TCC's insider says that updates to the HEMI might be underway and that the new styling direction of the 300 will maintain the sedan's gangsta cues, but the low roofline will probably be nixed in favor of a larger greenhouse.
[Source: The Car Connection]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
300Kid 2:19PM (2/14/2008)
That's fine with me, I love my 300 and would get another one lol.
Anyway, by then the car will have more than paid back Chrysler for its development and just make a profit for them - the way the last RWD 5th Ave. did thru the 80's. And if they continue to update it, for example with the new Phoenix v-6, it should stay competitive.
Reply
Owain Ozymandias Buck 5:55PM (2/14/2008)
I was thinking the same thing. My family had an '88 5th ave--that thing lived for years and years, and still wouldn't die. It was ancient, but they were decent cars.
Chrysler would be better positioned if the 300 platform was a bit smaller like the old M-body--or at least more efficient than the other old platforms.
Brent 2:33PM (2/14/2008)
It seems like the Charger and 300C are what everyone wants from a car (Big V8 & RWD) but few buy them.
Typical Response from autoblog reader:
"Give it a big V8 and RWD and I will buy it."
Reply
Polly Prissy Pants 3:00PM (2/14/2008)
If by "everybody" you mean Autoblog posters then yes, they all want V8's, RWD and standard transmissions. If by "everybody" you mean "everybody" then no, they want 40mpg in the city, automatic transmissions and a cheap price.
I'd also be surprised if even 1% of the people here actually followed through with the "Wow, if they build xyz I'd definitely buy one" routine.
Playdrv4me 2:21PM (2/14/2008)
The platform is fine, in-fact it's one of the Chrysler products that got heavy influence from Mercedes with the old W220 chassis internals.
What needs WORK is the ridiculous INTERIOR. I know ChryCo is working feverishly behind the scenes to fix this problem, but it'd be nice to see some early teaser shots of how they're coming along with that dreadfully needed fix.
Reply
Playdrv4me 2:22PM (2/14/2008)
Typo... W210 Chassis internals... not W220.
Reply
YourNameHere 2:24PM (2/14/2008)
can some please explain to me why RWD = bad MPG? i would think you could make a RWD layout more efficient in terms of drivetrain lose ect.
Reply
tekdemon 2:42PM (2/14/2008)
Well, for one thing RWD cars with engines in the front are heavier, because they have to transfer all the power to the rear wheels...and that doesn't happen without a weight penalty.
And drivetrain losses are also greater than FWD, since in FWD the engine is right there by the drive wheels, whereas you're obviously transferring the power through more components in most RWD designs.
Making the mileage even worse is the fact that RWD cars end up having more cramped interiors/trunks because of space being used up in the back of the car, so in order to maintain the same passenger/trunk space you need to make the car even bigger.
As far as efficiency goes it's pretty bad actually. If the engines were in the rear it wouldn't be as bad, so that's why the old school bugs/porsches would still be decently efficient.
AlexP 3:30PM (2/14/2008)
I was going to say "Related: Mini Cooper", but then I found out it was a FF car, meaning I don't understand why a premium GM mini-fighter or something along those lines would need to be FR.
YourNameHere 4:06PM (2/14/2008)
BMW seems to be doing ok with the RWD sedan thing. they turn out respectable milage. so im not sure i agree that RWD cant be efficient.
Derek 6:58PM (2/14/2008)
tekdemon, all those reasons are true, but very minimal.
A RWD car only has one more component in the driveline, and that is the driveshaft. Virtually no losse there. Hypoid gears in the rearend are slightly less efficient than spur gears used in the final drive of a transverse engine FF configuration, but we're not talking about a difference anyone would notice here, maybe a few percent.
Weight increase is only that of the driveshaft and rear differential. I'd wager you could get that under 5% of the weight of a modern midsize sedan.
Space used in the back is minimal as well. Especially when you consider how many cars are offered with AWD so their chassis is already made with room for a rear diff. Even most FWD only cars could fit a rear diff with minimal impact on cargo space. The trick is to get designers to configure space so it is usable.
The old VW's and Porsches were efficient because they were very light and had small engines with low HP output compared to what we "have" to have today.
Yournamehere makes a great point that BMW is currently proving that RWD cars can work. The problem with most RWD cars on the US market is that they are performance oriented and fuel economy suffers from the huge tires, ventilation scoops, high output engine, etc.
Jason 2:24PM (2/14/2008)
I'm glad to see they are sticking with the RWD, even if it's just for financial reasons.
Reply
500 3:47PM (2/14/2008)
Yeah Jason, sounds like they're doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. :-)
Robert 2:27PM (2/14/2008)
Chrysler should make a LWB version into a new Imperial.
Reply
Atropos 2:35PM (2/14/2008)
These are one of the few non sporty US cars being built that I actually like. Good to see that it's continuing.
Reply
tekdemon 2:44PM (2/14/2008)
BTW I find it kind of depressing that Chrysler will be using a decade old mercedes platform in 2011 =(
Reply
Ligor 6:38PM (2/14/2008)
well MB is pretty much doing the same untill the new E-class comes out
and i'm sure that if Kia made a chasis as goos as the 2000 BMW 5-series we'd all love it, even though BMW has moved on to better things
trickle down....
MemphisNET 2:46PM (2/14/2008)
@tekdemon
Smoke'em if you got'em. It's proven, it works - very well in fact.
Now, when they redesign it, maybe give it some more 300 HemiC concept cues!
http://araba.resimleri.tv/albums/userpics/10001/normal_Chrysler-300_HEMI_C_Convertible_Concept_2000_800x600_wallpaper_01.jpg
Reply
Andrew 2:47PM (2/14/2008)
It's not so much a low roof as the high belt line that gives it the "gangster" personality. There's actually ample head room. This car is aging very well, still looks good to me. I wish I needed one.
Reply
500 4:01PM (2/14/2008)
My thoughts exactly. The car's not really that low, just a visual trick. They must mean that they're going back to the 90's-style low beltline, like the Intrepid/Concorde/300M.
I prefer the current look.