Chrysler Crossfire - Anyone Bought One?
Discussion
GCerbera said:
We wanted to road test one but Chrysler wouldn't lend us one 
Really, who did you speak to?
The bods at Daimler Chrysler's press office. They basically said that PH is a performance car site (true enough) and that they didn't want to get involved with that market!
GCerbera said:
mmm.....chrysler Crossfire or Nissan 350Z Nismo.
Interesting comment Nightmare.
Have you tried both?
Similar price, but the Crossfire 'appears' to have more power (could be wrong here?)
I have as it goes...(sorry, have NOT driven a 350Z nismo, just the standard) but....Nisaan : sounded nicer, more playful tail, cool interior (especially for a japanese car) and comes with that bulletproof piece of mind of any Nissan. Crossfire in my view is a little bit of a compromised car - simply because it's based on an existing and now oudated platform (SLK). I really liked it - quick and fun and nothing like an SLK, but I still found the Nissan more special somehow. It made me what to be a bit hooligan...the crossfire really didnt.
think that's personal taste definite.ly...but also think time wil make the 350Z 'wear' better....think the crssfire will date v fast.
Nismo variant supposed to be more hardcore and well worth the extra few pennies for the extra giggles.
just opinions though!
Night
Why inflict 'dumping dog' styling on the otherwise very pleasant SLK320?
I agree that the SLK is a bit of a cruiser rather than an out-and-out sports car. But it has quality and presence. The Crossfire has neither - plus it has a brash Yankiness about it which is somewhat embarrassing in civilised company.
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Saturday 20th March 18:36
I agree that the SLK is a bit of a cruiser rather than an out-and-out sports car. But it has quality and presence. The Crossfire has neither - plus it has a brash Yankiness about it which is somewhat embarrassing in civilised company.
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Saturday 20th March 18:36
nickwilcock said:Hey, get of the fence Nick..
Why inflict 'dumping dog' styling on the otherwise very pleasant SLK320?
I agree that the SLK is a bit of a cruiser rather than an out-and-out sports car. But it has quality and presence. The Crossfire has neither - plus it has a brash Yankiness about it which is somewhat embarrassing in civilised company.
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Saturday 20th March 18:36
There seems to be a marked anti-American snobbery that is increasingly hard to justify. The Crossfire may not be a great car in a true sports car sense but not only is it distinctive, I think it's extremely good-lookig. the only mistake I can see made by Chrysler is not giving it a V8.
I don't agree that it's looks will date. It is hardly brash in the sense of the 50's American styling era but hell, they were great cars. Indeed, it is the very uniqueness of the Crossfire's design that will make it stand the test of time.
I find it pretty laughable when people knock it for it's design and then come up with something as dull as an RX8 as an alternative. The S2000 is a deadly dull generic Japanese design and fair play to the 350Z for coming up with a classic design. It is the one design that in a world of car snobbery might actually cut the mustard. However, I imagine that it's very popularity will relegate it to the realms of outdated designs in the same way as the Audi TT. But that is to miss the point of the Crossfire which is a different type of car, more an old style GT than a fast and furious wannabe. As for comparisons with the Mercedes upon which it is based, pass me another generic Mercedes design because they're just so distinctive.
Whatever the car is like, I admire the style of it because all cars don't have to look the same. As a TVR owner, you should appreciate that, no doubt.
It may be a million miles away from what Chrysler are worried about anyway as the car's main market will be in the US where they like their heritage and can appreciate a good styling concept, notwithstanding their own badge snobbery for imported cars.
And I don't recall the VW Beetle ever suffering from it's "dog having a poo" stance.
I don't agree that it's looks will date. It is hardly brash in the sense of the 50's American styling era but hell, they were great cars. Indeed, it is the very uniqueness of the Crossfire's design that will make it stand the test of time.
I find it pretty laughable when people knock it for it's design and then come up with something as dull as an RX8 as an alternative. The S2000 is a deadly dull generic Japanese design and fair play to the 350Z for coming up with a classic design. It is the one design that in a world of car snobbery might actually cut the mustard. However, I imagine that it's very popularity will relegate it to the realms of outdated designs in the same way as the Audi TT. But that is to miss the point of the Crossfire which is a different type of car, more an old style GT than a fast and furious wannabe. As for comparisons with the Mercedes upon which it is based, pass me another generic Mercedes design because they're just so distinctive.
Whatever the car is like, I admire the style of it because all cars don't have to look the same. As a TVR owner, you should appreciate that, no doubt.
It may be a million miles away from what Chrysler are worried about anyway as the car's main market will be in the US where they like their heritage and can appreciate a good styling concept, notwithstanding their own badge snobbery for imported cars.
And I don't recall the VW Beetle ever suffering from it's "dog having a poo" stance.
LuS1fer said:
There seems to be a marked anti-American snobbery that is increasingly hard to justify. The Crossfire may not be a great car in a true sports car sense but not only is it distinctive, I think it's extremely good-lookig. the only mistake I can see made by Chrysler is not giving it a V8.
I'm sure te bods at Brabus will oblige in the near future - they got a huge V8 in an SLK...
Don't think a Crysler V8 would fit (physically in the engine bay) though??? They're quite big lumps IIRC
LuS1fer said:
And I don't recall the VW Beetle ever suffering from it's "dog having a poo" stance.
More's the pity
Well this is an old thread. I bought a crossfire srt6, and still have it today. Im so glad i did because they are absolutely fantastic, its still worth around 12 grand too. Utterly reliable, great to drive, and sooo fast. Granted ive spent 1500 pounds on a dcai, pulley and eurocharged tune but it accelerates faster than all but the most exotic cars even today, ten years later. If anybody is reading this thread and wants a second hand fast coupe forget the 350z, ive owned one, they steer slighty sharper than the srt6 but are outclassed in every other area and even a stock srt6 would absolutely leave it for dead at the traffic light grand prix. Ahh but they are faster round the track you say.. No they arent. They actually grip a little less than the srt6 and dont brake as sharply. However i will say they are a bit nicer to drive round a track. On the road its the other way around. Crossfires are so much rarer and have aged rather well. Even today they get a lot of attention. Good attention. If you can find an srt6 get it, you wont be disappointed. Plus if you get just 1500 worth of mods like mine you can actually out accelerate a gallardo. And thats nice to know 😉
Nice Crossfire.. Like them a lot and anything JC criticises must be good!
Its a really nice car especially the ragtop, but for a real solid and tough bargain these days try a C4 Corvette, 245bhp, 345torks, 32mpg, easy diy maintenance, cheapish parts, great sound etc... and despite what yank haters say, they do really handle and stop well. GRP body and galvanised frame, so no rust issues. That clamshell front end gives GT6 type access to the motor..
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C811642
Its a really nice car especially the ragtop, but for a real solid and tough bargain these days try a C4 Corvette, 245bhp, 345torks, 32mpg, easy diy maintenance, cheapish parts, great sound etc... and despite what yank haters say, they do really handle and stop well. GRP body and galvanised frame, so no rust issues. That clamshell front end gives GT6 type access to the motor..
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C811642
A friend of mine had and SRT6 and it wasn't bad. It was plenty quick enough (330hp) and it steered and handled okay with a decent ride. Interior was pretty awful (like most American cars of the era) and it didn't stack up on interior quality to similarly priced rivals, but I liked the look of the outside and I think they've aged well. They are pretty good 2nd hand buy if you can find a decent one.
Just a personal opinion.RBH58 said:
A friend of mine had and SRT6 and it wasn't bad. It was plenty quick enough (330hp) and it steered and handled okay with a decent ride. Interior was pretty awful (like most American cars of the era) and it didn't stack up on interior quality to similarly priced rivals, but I liked the look of the outside and I think they've aged well. They are pretty good 2nd hand buy if you can find a decent one.
Interior was straight out of the slk so not really an American era thing , maybe Germany 1996.I had one from new for 10 years. Clarksons topgear review knocked £10k off values over night,apparently because Daimler-Chrysler wouldn't give him a free family trip to Vegas for the official launch.
Mercedes make life extremely difficult to get parts once they know it's for a Chrysler , FIAT want top whack for old stock parts, there's a breaker in the North but not all is good quality. Check for rear wheel arch rust and the tin pop up spoiler,finding a decent replacement is like finding rocking horse s
t. Paint is thin so expect touch ups.Up until year 10 not a thing went wrong (as above) , fast cruiser which surprised quite a few who presumed it was a slow car , 60-100 it was no slouch and sure footed up to 130. Got us around Europe on 5 occasions. SRT versions seem to be holding their value now.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff