In the 2000s, DaimlerChrysler created a sports car that on paper, should have been a smash hit. The Chrysler Crossfire blended art deco styling with solid Mercedes-Benz bones for what could have been another hot neo-retro seller. Instead, the Crossfire was trashed by the press and enthusiasts alike and sales fell off of a cliff quickly. The Crossfire might have been a failure back then but we think it’s a quirky used car bargain today worthy of a pardon.
There has been endless ink spilled about the comedy of errors that was DaimlerChrysler. We’ve all heard about the so-called “merger of equals” and less-often quoted is Daimler chairman Jürgen Schrempp, who called it a “marriage made in heaven.” One of the touted benefits of the 1998 merger was that mass-market Chrysler brand vehicles would be infused with the high-quality engineering of more exclusive Mercedes-Benz vehicles. This sounds like a situation where everyone wins, right? Chrysler gets better engineering while Mercedes tech spreads far and wide.
Americans got to witness the fruits of this labor from the Chrysler LX platform to the Pacifica crossover. Let’s take a stop at the LX platform, which underpinned such important cars as the Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger, and Dodge Magnum for an incredible 19 years. A shortened version of the LX became the LC for the Challenger. Motor Trend describes part of why LX cars are revered by their fans:
There’s plenty of Benz, mostly of the E-Class variety, in these large machines. The aluminum five-link rear suspension on all 300s is based on the E-Class design, but the 300 has a wider track and bigger wheels and tires, with a steel cradle in place of the E’s aluminum one. The 300’s 120-inch wheelbase is two inches longer than the E-Class’s and just one inch shy of the Mercedes S-Class’s. Its seating position is 2.5 inches higher than the 2004 300M’s, and its generous interior has lots of rear-seat legroom and headroom for six-footers.
Chrysler also spent 30 months and under a billion dollars scraping the Chrysler parts bin and Mercedes technology bin to create the Pacifica crossover, another high-tech ride. This one was received well and it managed to sell 393,471 copies over a production run spanning seven years. I’ve had the pleasure of being in a Pacifica and it was surprising in how elevated it was compared to other Chrysler products of the era.
Tom Marinelli, then the Vice President of Chrysler Marketing, said that the Crossfire and the Pacifica were pivotal moments for Chrysler:
“Without question, Pacifica and Crossfire mark a pivotal time in the 80-year history of the Chrysler brand.” “With a complete lineup of head-turning vehicles, our showrooms have never looked better. With the addition of Pacifica and Crossfire, Chrysler will now have some of the most appealing vehicles under one roof.”
So, what happened with the Crossfire?
The Marriage Bears Fruit
The above context is important because the first new vehicle to come out of the now-infamous merger was the Crossfire, a halo that was supposed to define the new era. The Crossfire was supposed to be a showcase of how German engineering and American design could, at least on paper, produce the best of both worlds.
According to a Car and Driver piece from 2003, the Crossfire wasn’t just a technical showcase of DaimlerChrysler, but it was also designed to be Chrysler’s answer to the Audi TT. The concept for the Crossfire was the brainchild of Eric Stoddard, who was then just 25 years old.
According to Stoddard, he was inspired by America’s Art Deco period and streamlined cars like Bugattis and the Talbot Lago. He combined those elements together in a vehicle with an extreme cab-rearward profile plus a boattail design. Stoddard also incorporated a central spine which carried the length of the vehicle, even splitting the windshield along the way. Stoddard offers more details in an old interview with Motor Trend:
“It’s intended to blend the youthful, sophisticated small sports look of coupes from Europe with the classic, powerful appearance of all-American coupes,” said Stoddard. “And it has to be a driver’s machine, nimble and agile. If [show attendees] see a car that’s international in appeal but distinctively American in character, we have a winner. The long hood emphasizes horsepower and rear-wheel drive. The expressive face, raking profile, and tapering rear glass give the Crossfire its American flavor. And its proportions and stance make it fit in just as well with some of the great small sports cars of Europe.”
As for that name? Chrysler offers an explanation:
The name “Crossfire” was conceived during the development of the vehicle’s distinctive character line which moves precisely and rapidly from front to rear. The character line “crosses” to a negative formation from a positive formation as it travels quickly from the front through the rear fender. Rear fenders are muscular and wide and conclude in the large, sculpted tail lamps. The side profile is complete with metallic-finished side air louvers.
If you’re having some big feelings about the Crossfire right now, Chrysler says that is the point. Designer Joe Dehner was tasked with the job of turning Stoddard’s striking design into something that could be put into production. Many concepts reach production as cars that only vaguely look like their concept. The Crossfire was not that as Dehner preserved Stoddard’s lines while translating them into a final product.
Speaking to Car and Driver, Dehner said the point of the design was “to evoke a strong, passionate, emotional response. We had to retain that. We want to polarize our audience—we want people to love it or hate it.”
Most of Stoddard’s design made it to production, with the biggest changes happening to parts that would have been impractical to put into production, namely the spine that ran through the windshield and rear window. Chrysler also had to change the concept car’s face to give the Crossfire its recognizable corporate look.
Reportedly, turning the concept design into a production car wasn’t as hard as it could have been and that was because of what was underneath the Art Deco sheet metal. DaimlerChrysler kicked open the door for Chrysler to dig into an expansive pile of parts from Mercedes-Benz.
It was also decided that the Crossfire needed to be built on an in-house platform. Thankfully, gaining access to the Mercedes-Benz ecosystem meant Chrysler found just the right pairing. The R170 generation Mercedes-Benz SLK-Class was about the right size and featured the kind of firepower Chrysler wanted under the hood.
Calling the Crossfire a rebadged SLK would not be fair, however, the Crossfire is said to share around 40 percent of its parts with the donor Mercedes. These parts include the R170’s chassis, engine, transmission, track width, wheelbase, and suspension. There’s so much Mercedes-Benz in the Crossfire that you could even put Mercedes seats in the Crossfire. This means Crossfire drivers get unequal length double wishbone suspension, a five-link suspension in the rear, recirculating ball steering, and an aggressive stance with 18-inch wheels up front and a pair of 19s in the rear.
What you got was more or less a Mercedes-Benz SLK320 but with a Chrysler body on top. However, there was a weird quirk in that production of the Crossfire began in early 2003 while production of the R170 ended in early 2004. That means for most of the Crossfire’s life, it was riding on a chassis that first debuted in 1995 and had already been surpassed by its own automaker.
Still, the Crossfire was still more or less a Mercedes with a Chrysler badge. It was pretty well equipped, too. The base model got the Mercedes-Benz M112 3.2-liter V6 good for 215 HP and 229 lb-ft of torque. Opting for the SRT-6 version netted you the same engine, but boosted with a supercharger to 330 HP and 310 lb-ft of torque. It was basically a Mercedes-Benz SLK 32 AMG with a Chrysler badge!
The options weren’t bad, either, and included a six-speaker Infinity sound system, CD-based GPS navigation, leather, a power spoiler, a six-speed manual transmission, and the option to get the Crossfire as a convertible with a power top.
This all sounds great, right? It was even built by Karmann in Germany! Using the Mercedes bones also meant a quick two-year development period at a cost of only $275 million.
The Media Has A Field Day
Unfortunately for the Crossfire, the media wasn’t as kind to the child of DaimlerChrysler’s marriage as it would be to the Pacifica.
Let’s start with perhaps the biggest outlet to spit on the Crossfire, and that’s Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear:
Right from the top, Clarkson described the vehicle’s rear end as resembling a dog taking a Morning Dump. As for performance, Clarkson noted that it was good that the vehicle’s 3,084-pound weight was lower than its rivals. The version he tested with the base engine took 7.2 seconds to hit 60 mph, which Clarkson found unimpressive. Clarkson also wasn’t a fan of the manual transmission or the apparently “detached” feel of the steering. The Top Gear segment continued by pointing out flaws with the suspension, the legroom, the size of the steering wheel, the visibility, and even the interior quality. Clarkson even panned the engine’s performance and fuel economy.
Top Gear hated the Crossfire so much that the magazine version of the outlet named it as one of the “13 Worst Cars of the Past 20 Years.” That’s a big yikes!
In a 2009 retrospective, Car and Driver seemed to support what Clarkson said:
What do you get when you combine a bunch of rehashed, last-generation Mercedes-Benz chassis components with overwrought styling and a bit of D-town pride? This bright-eyed hunk of weirdness, that’s what.
The Crossfire fell victim to that most heinous of sporty-car sins: It did nothing uniquely. Its chassis was borrowed from the 1997-to-2004 Mercedes-Benz SLK, and like the SLK, the Crossfire was a decent, if not brilliant, sporting GT. Potential buyers were put off by the art-deco looks and the $35,000-plus buy-in, and many simply bought an SLK instead. Or an Infiniti G35 or a BMW 3-series, both of which were more fun to drive than the Crossfire, and neither of which looked like a dog in the middle of a life-altering dump. (Incidentally, whose bright idea was it to name a car after multidirectional gunfire, anyway? In what world do you want a car whose name implies that it might go off in any direction at any moment, killing innocent bystanders?)
How’s this for flop: In the second year of Crossfire production, Chrysler actually resorted to dumping excess inventory on Overstock.com. Flop, flop, flopperoo.
Edmunds also wasn’t very nice to the Crossfire in its 2013 retrospective:
Note to manufacturers: Don’t name cars after something you don’t want to be caught in.
Born out of the Chrysler/Daimler-Benz partnership, the Crossfire was built on an aging SLK roadster platform. It seemed that most were pleased with the Crossfire’s boattail styling, but as the aforementioned Ford Thunderbird proved, style only goes so far.
The antiquated recirculating-ball steering made it slow to respond, handling was disappointing and at the same time, the ride was harsh. To further pile on the drawbacks, the interior fell short of expectations, as did overall performance and everyday convenience. In the end, not even Celine Dion could save the Crossfire, and the final insult came when remainders were sold off on overstock.com and eBay.
These retrospectives were mean, but so were other period reviews. The Telegraph also disliked the car:
This is indubitably the worst car I have ever driven. It beggars belief that the aristocrats of engineering, the artistes formerly known as Mercedes-Benz, have associated their name with such an aesthetic, functional and social atrocity.
[…]
The Crossfire is assembled by Karmann, which appears to have lost interest early in the process. Having clearly spent most of the budget on simulated louvres, nothing was left to lavish on glue and fastenings inside, so bits of trim hang loose. The facia is moulded in the sort of remorselessly hard and shiny plastic I last saw in a Russian car. In another masterpiece of simulation, the leather seats feel like Ghana Airways first-class lounge vinyl. Mercedes-Benz switchgear has been disguised by a horrible, shiny aluminium coating and the glovebox door does not fit.
The steering wheel is big, fat and ugly, with a lurid Chrysler badge to remind you of what a silly way you have spent your money. There is no cover for the exposed – yet exiguous – luggage area and there are no sensible storage options, no luggage nets or ties. Overall, the effect is physiologically and psychologically uncomfortable, the feeling crass and clumsy.
By now you will be wanting to know how it drives. The Crossfire is largely based on the old-model Mercedes-Benz SLK, but feels as though it is based on a detuned 1967 AMC Marlin with locked-solid suspension. Unusually large wheels – bigger aft than forward – contribute to an unyielding and crashing ride. Stopwatch statistics look fast, but the engine feels feeble: the Crossfire is slow to pick up speed and when it does, you have too much. This car does not invite driving. On the contrary, it invites parking. The gearchange is obdurate, especially reverse – strange for a car that so resolutely looks backwards.
Yikes! The press was harsh, but they may have been onto something. This was a Chrysler sports car with a $34,495 price tag and vintage Mercedes bones. Technically, it was possible to option one of these to $50,000 if you ordered your Crossfire as a convertible SRT-6. How did the public respond? 35,700 Crossfires were built in 2003 and 28,000 were built in 2004. Hey, that’s not bad for a sports car! Then, production and sales fell off of a cliff. Just 12,500 were built in 2005, 4,805 were built in 2006, and a paltry 2,000 were built in 2007.
The last Crossfire was built in December 2007 as Chrysler chose not to continue its production as part of its restructuring plan. Reportedly, Chrysler wanted to sell 20,000 units a year, which it did at first, but the automaker just couldn’t keep the momentum going.
Time Heals Wounds
It’s no longer 2007 anymore and I think it’s time to view the Crossfire in a new light.
A lot of enthusiasts are looking for affordable used cars with a bit of flair and personality. I think the Crossfire has all of that in spades. One huge advocate of the Crossfire is Stephen Walter Gossin, who recognizes that the Crossfire isn’t perfect, but that really doesn’t matter:
The first thing every review complains about is the “wooden” steering. I feel like one dude might have felt that way, then the rest of automotive media just piled on with a big “Yeah, what they said!”. The steering is fine. You turn the wheel and the car changes direction. If you’re on a track or using it for performance driving, then I’m sure there are comparative disadvantages, but most owners will be in daily traffic and getting dinners/ice cream and at C&C with these cars. It’s a 2-seater, so most owners will have another car also. The Jeep transmission has a very low 1st gear (probably for Jeeps), so unless you need to rocket off the line at a light, you can start in 2nd gear most of the time. The interior plastics are the worst part of this car and they were designed and implemented by Mercedes engineers, and placed in the car by Mercedes employees at a Mercedes factory.
With that said, it’s infuriating to hear reviewers state that it’s the “usual Chrysler cheap-assery” on the interior when the only Chrysler-sourced part on the entire car is the badge/manual transmission. These cars are engineered, designed and produced by Mercedes with a Chrysler badge. Here, look at the window sticker:
The staggered wheels, the phenomenal Deco design and the fact that it’s pretty much just 2 seats strapped to a decent-sized RWD V6 makes these cars the best case for spending your $3500 in this guys’ opinion.
I’m inclined to agree with Gossin here. The values of the Crossfire have dropped to insanely low levels. You can find a rough, but running example for just a couple of grand. If that’s too slow for you, there’s the SRT-6 and its performance goodies. Sure, you trade a manual transmission for an automatic, but you do get a sports car that hits 60 mph in 5.1 seconds with its AMG-style suspension and braking components. Even those could be had for a bit over $10,000.
That’s the beauty of looking at a car a couple of decades after it ended production. Sure, paying nearly $35,000 for a coupe with a Chrysler badge was a huge ask in 2004. However, now these cars are cheap; so inexpensive that might even be able to be purchased for the mythical “screw it” money. The hard plastic and parts bin raiding hurt a lot less when you don’t have as much skin in the game.
Yet, at the same time, the Crossfire was still just a pretty cool car on its own. It’s awesome Chrysler even put this car on the market when it could have just stayed the course of producing forgettable runabouts. If anything, I’d love for more automakers to take more big swings like this today.
I’m not going to tell you to buy one of these over an old Audi TT, an Infiniti G35, or even the SLK it’s built on. However, if you’re looking for something a bit different, I’d say look past Clarkson’s complaints and hop into the squatting dog of sports cars.
Love the art deco
Counterpoint on the Pacifica: I got a 2008 model when our second kid was born. The steering rack died almost immediately because “build quality.”
Nevertheless drove it until it was totaled, about ten years. My wife, the real driver in the family, haaaated it and refused to drive it. Her nickname for it, based on its agility, was “the Drunken Rhino.”
Fun fact, it’s one of the few German coupes not built for tall people!
The SRT6 version would be a cool collector car for your local Mopar nerd, but the now discontinued $600 OEM key fob, mixed with Mercedes everything (so everything’s overpriced) will get you a bad time, all the time.
It was kinda wild though that they used the NSG-370 for the manual versions. Sharing a transmission with the JK…… What a useless piece of trivia!
Detroit isn’t really in the habit of making cars with good handling primarily because Detroit has no good driving roads. Turns and corners are so confusing to Detroiters that they’ve made it illegal to make left turns.
You say that, but have you forgotten that GM is basically a chassis and suspension god? Guess who makes MagneRide and guess who uses it? Cadillac sedans (especially the V series and Blackwings) have been lauded for their handling dynamics and superb chassis control since the whole Art and Science rebrand over 20 years ago. The Camaro has been touted to be a superb driving pill-box that you can’t see out of and isn’t practical to fit a set of golf clubs. The Corvette holds its own against cars 3x, 4x, 5x and even more expensive.
The idea that American brands don’t handle is a dumb idea even during the muscle car era, because, well, most cars couldn’t handle.
“Detroit isn’t really in the habit of making cars with good handling primarily because Detroit has no good driving roads.”
I disagree. There have been plenty of great handling cars made by Detroit automaker. All the Corvettes from the C4 and and on. And recent Mustangs handle well too… as did the Dodge Viper.
And the Taurus and Chrysler LH cars handled well for FWD family sedans.
And the RWD Chrysler LX cars also handle decently well and the people who say they don’t have never driven them.
And there are numerous other examples of good handling American cars.
And let’s not forget that Tesla is American and their cars also handle very well.
I mean this kind of a moot point even if there was any truth to it because this was a car designed, built and engineered by Mercedes Benz using parts leftover from an outgoing Mercedes Benz.
I’m just agreeing with the statement that Detroit has no good driving roads. Unless, of course, things have changed since I lived there circa 1994-95.
I’m not going claim it’s a fair opinion, but I’ll never look at a Crossfire and not think of Clarkson’s comparison (right at the 3 minute mark: https://youtu.be/k-tjiKIUhf0?si=4G8yoj2iDdwUl_LT ).
I’m reminded of Jerry Wayne Longmire’s observation of a “Squat Truck”…”Aw your Nissan got worms”
Well now that’s another thing I can never unthink…
I think the coupe is extremely cool. it seems like they’re mostly gone in the northeast like the same-ben SLK
Shhh, between this and the Solstice you’ve been giving away all my ideas for fun second cars!
I think part of the reason why people hate these is because if you wanted a Chrysler or Dodge coupe after 2003, your choice was either this, or the Sebring/200. You wouldn’t get into a 300M or later the 300C, you wouldn’t get into a Pacifica, and you definitely wouldn’t get into a PT Cruiser to have a comparison of just how bad the interior was on the Crossfire and Sebring. I’ve seen a video of someone getting into a Crossfire just released from the lease and snapping the windshield control stalk off. Most of the ones I see for sale privately have the button coatings worn down so you can see the peach or black coloured plastic underneath, or the seats look like they came out of an ’84 Cavalier owned by a family of meth addicts for ten years, or the headliner’s falling down, or the plastic cover over the gauges has yellowed to the point of making them unreadable unless you turn the headlights on to illuminate them, or the airbag cover on the steering wheel has decided to leave, or the glove compartment won’t close, or… There’s a lot of things wrong with the interiors of these, and the issues showed up after the first year of ownership, leading to the absolute asteroid crash of sales once word of mouth spread.
I mean, why? I can buy a used BMW 128i for about the same price for the same number of years and miles, and that’s fundamentally a much better car. Steering is on point, engine/transmission are relatively reliable (135’s were less reliable), and it’s a proper German driver’s car.
When I saw the Crossfire image I honestly thought this was a Saturday version of Shitbox Showdown. Nope, not for me. Never has been, and never will be.
“The interior plastics are the worst part of this car and they were designed and implemented by Mercedes engineers, and placed in the car by Mercedes employees at a Mercedes factory.”
And therein lies the problem. Mercedes had abysmal quality in the 2000s, having stretched their resources too thin trying to expand into new niches (A and B Class, ML…). It’s 2024 and they’ re still haven’t managed to bounce back from that when you compare their interiors to Audi, BMW or Lexus.
Yeah. Certainly there’s next to no Chrysler in it, but I’m not sure “Built to the quality standard of early-2000s Mercedes using leftover parts from mid-90s Mercedes” is really that much of a flex.
SWG has made me like these even more…also, it’s just a good name! Reminds me of the Olds Starfire, which is a name I also really like along w/ Sunbird which I used to have an ’86 hatchback
Ok, follow-up to my small love letter below. Given the sales numbers, there would seem to be a lot of comments by people who never touched a Crossfire.
The engine was built by MB near Stuttgart, not by Chrysler, along with all of the fairly bullet-proof 320s the company used for near 20 years. The car was built by Karmann in Onasbruck, also not by Chrysler. It’s as much a Chrysler as today’s Supra is a Toyota. In 120,000 miles I had a crank position sensor go bad (unfortunately common), and it was uncomfortable to reach backwards and flip a wire fastener to replace bulbs in the headlamps. That’s the list. The car was as stiff and rattle-free when I passed it along as it was when new.
Which is to say, if you don’t like the Crossfire, then you’re not going to like one, but that won’t have anything to do with “build quality by Chrysler.” Just horses for courses.
If, on the other hand, the idea of the car makes you smile, then actually driving one will keep you smiling. It is, for better, exactly the car you think it is.
The roadster was more successful as a design than the coupe, but the fixed-head was way more distinctive. I wouldn’t mind having one, even with its Kirkland Signature SLK vibes, but my recollection about why Gossin Motors Backyard Auto Rescue, Son parted with his was that parts were becoming expensive enough to make the ownership experience prohibitive.
(edited to fix syntax)
Geoff! You are absolutely correct my man and excellent recollection/memory of the below. Also thanks for remembering my tag-line, son!
Crossfires rule wicked hard and are such a cheap, fun buy, but yes, the $600 OEM key fobs (from Mercedes) and the no-aftermarket-replacement, 20yr-old ~$400 headlight replacements aren’t the best.
https://www.theautopian.com/even-cheap-cars-can-be-expensive-a-hard-lesson-i-learned-about-the-repair-parts-minefield/
I always liked the styling of these, but the build quality was poor (usual for Chrysler, less so for Mercedes but this was when Merc was in a quality nosedive of their own), and the mechanicals are complex and expensive without offering much reward for that complexity.
I had one of these that developed a knock deep in the motor. No Mercedes mechanic would touch it, and I couldn’t find a mechanic that knew anything about working on a Mercedes motor. No one I trusted, anyway. Chrysler dealer mechanics didn’t have a clue. Did a used motor swap and dumped it. And the headliners just fall down. One of the worst car experiences I ever had.
I had one with a knock in the engine as well.
I think you nailed the ownership experience with these cars; they are an orphaned from divorced parents (Chrysler & Mercedes) and it is difficult to find parts and repair ownership from either entity.
I feel like this was part of Mercedes sabotaging Chrysler. They took a look at the distinctive design and decided to foist off all their outdated parts to Chrysler for production. The Germans knew what they were doing.
I had a light blue convertible 6spd that I bought after my 500c Abarth was totaled. Exterior wise, I loved it. Always got a lot of positive remarks. Seats were comfortable. Manual transmission shifts were ‘bulky.’ Good acceleration. Yes, the interior was a bit of a let down. Decent trunk space for weekend get away bags. (Chrysler actually sold a luggage set that fit 3 pieces in there).
I took it on a 450 mile drive to Niagara Falls Memorial Day weekend 2023. No comfort issues for me. My GF would have preferred more leg room on the passenger side. IIRC, the passenger side did not have as many adjustments as the driver’s seat. On Monday, the Valet said the car would not start. Long story short, the Crankshaft Position Sensor failed. This is a known issue, as apparently it gets too hot from the exhaust. I had it and the Cam Position Sensor replaced about 10,000 before. Got it towed to a Dealership in Canada and they could not get the part from Chrysler anymore and the local parts store could not source one until the next day.
When I got it home I ordered a spare CPS and left it in the trunk with my tool kit. I found another Abarth that fall and sold the Crossfire.
If you are thinking of buying one, Get spare CPS. As cars become more and more gray jellybeans, you will appreciate it every time you drive it
I don’t hate it, but back in the day I ended up buying a CPO Z3 after looking at (and driving) the OG SLK that it’s based on. Yep, the SLK and Crossfire are cruisers, which is fine for those who like cruisers – I prefer a touch more spice (and preference is part of why there are so many different cars). I didn’t even consider the Crossfire once I drove the SLK, and realized that on top of its meh handling and not particularly comfortable interior I’d also have to “enjoy” the tender mercies of our local Chrysler Plymouth stores. I still own and frequently drive the Z3, which I seriously doubt would be the case with the Xfire.
I pretty much agree with the thrust of this article. When the Crossfire came out, it couldn’t compete with other new sporty coupes due to it’s aged chassis, chintzy components, etc. But now, it’s an old car that competes with other old cars, and its positive aspects start to weigh better against the negatives. Obviously, if you want something for “spirited driving”, as we say, then you need to look at some other old cars. but if you want a cruiser that has a unique look to it at a decent price, then this might fit. Don’t know if I’d ever buy one – I still am not sure whether I like the looks of the thing or not.
Solid take, my dude.
The first time I saw a Crossfire I thought “Someday, this car will be on the grass at Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance”. I still believe that.
You’re supposed to pick those up with the little plastic baggies they provide.
My boy Gossin spitting facts; the Crossfire was ALWAYS COOL.
I don’t care what the reviews said; it was a bold design with deco influence, the proportions were great and made even better with the staggered wheels, and the interior is …. fine. It’s not great. But it’s not awful either. I really feel like if anyone wants to complain about interiors, they should be forced to spend some time in a J-body cavalier or something like that.
I really wish Chrysler would have continued on the deco theme of the ME-4-12 concept car, and just applied that styling to all their models and stayed with it. It still looks fresh.
Cavalier was less than half the price.
My man! Absolutely agreed on the ME-4-12.
Somewhere in an alternate dimension that car was green-lighted and completely changed everything by ruling so hard.
Facts, son!
No way I’m getting caught in the crossfire. The beginning of the end of both Chrysler and the good MB…it’s a sad pile.