Crossfire

  • Thread starter Thread starter General Schvantzkoph
  • Start date Start date
G

General Schvantzkoph

I just saw a Crossfire and it's a beautiful looking car, at least from the
front. I'd be interested in hearing from Crossfire owners about how the
like it?
 
I had to make a joke but apparently sales are pretty bad. Consumer Reports
gave it a thrashing. Basically it supposed to be an archaic Mercedes
design. Mercedes will have a new model with its own badge soon.
 
By archaic you mean this year's model, or last year's? Don't be stupid. It's
basically a Mercedes SL, built in Germany, with a boattail top, priced in
the 30's. Not bad, if anybody wanted that sort of thing. So far, nobody
does.

As a two seater priced in the mid 30's, they won't expect to sell many, but
I read in R&T today that sales have been worse than expected. The
convertible, apparently, is coming out, and the prices have been lowered,
and there may be an RT version, all to help get it going. I think it looks
great, but of course it's so very impractical, only somebody with several
other new cars would buy one.
 
SLK. Convertible ("Roadster") already out and shown on Chrysler.com and .de
websites.

Prices are shown and, just as a check, I looked at the inventory of a
Philadelphia dealer -- in stock.

Built largely by Karmann of Osnabrueck, who build the CLK cabrio and many
other convertibles.
http://www.karmann.de/

DAS
 
Putting new sheet metal on a 1997 design and thinking you will fool sports
car enthusiasts is pretty stupid.
 
Putting new sheet metal on a 1997 design and thinking you will fool sports
car enthusiasts is pretty stupid.
Click to expand...

I dunno, BMW did it with the Z3 (front half of a 1991 car and the back
half of a 1984 car, sold for the first time in, I believe, the end of
1995) and it worked like a charm. Let's not forget the Jaguar XK8,
which in 2004 rolls on a chassis first developed in 1969 for the XJ6,
or the outgoing Discovery which shared dimensions with the 1971 Range
Rover. There have been plenty of new silk purses sewn from old sow's
ears.

More pertinently, the 1997 (well, it's older than that, as it is
related to the first-gen Cheap-class) platform does a lot of things
perfectly well, so it isn't even a sow's ear, really. It is not
terribly sporting in character but it is relatively solid and decent
to drive.

Its primary competition is the Audi TT, which is based on the Mark IV
Golf of equal vintage to the SLK. And the SRT-6 looks like it will be
a fun way to experience the AMG Kompressor V6 in its most affordable
installation.

The car's only real problem is that the market for two-seaters just
isn't that large and it is populated by people with cast-in-stone
brand loyalties. The SRT-6 is likely to be as quick and fast as an
auto-tranny C5, whether convertible or hardtop, but how many Vette
loyalists are going to shop at the Chrysler store?

I predict the car will see additional success as the 300 continues to
halo the brand and bring a different group of people into the
showrooms.
 
Dori said:
SLK. Convertible ("Roadster") already out and shown on Chrysler.com
and .de websites.

Prices are shown and, just as a check, I looked at the inventory of a
Philadelphia dealer -- in stock.

Built largely by Karmann of Osnabrueck, who build the CLK cabrio and
many other convertibles.
http://www.karmann.de/
Click to expand...

There was one convertible amongst the Crossfires at our "Gold Medal Tour"
marketing day by DaimlerChrysler Canada yesterday in Mississauga near
Toronto.

They and the coupe looked smart, rode and drove nicely. I thought the manual
control of the automatic strange as it was pull left to go down a gear, push
right to go up. You had to pull left all the way from Drive, 4, 3, 2, to get
first for a drag start! When you wanted to get into drive you have to push
through each. It probably makes sense to someone who has a motorbike (or a
sequential racing box) but seemed odd to me. The PT Cruiser Convertible
Turbo at least had a different slot for manual selection and you could go
back to drive whatever manually selected gear you were in. They were still
"left for down and right for up". Somehow "forward and backward" for gear
changes seems more logical to me. That may be affected by having used the
regular low positions on an automatic, and my wife's Zoom Zoom Mazda 3
Sport.

Also drove a 300c on a mini-test track to try to see the effect of ESP.
Difficult to establish the circumstances to really feel it, but the cars
rode nicely and felt that there was some life under the hood/bonnet.
Certainly the pull away at the start from a greased metal panel showed the
traction control part of ESP working well.

The briefest part of the day was the driven trips around the damp parking
lot circuit in an SRT4 - very lively; the SRT 10 - extremely lively; and
then the Viper!

The circuit was set up so that the people queuing could see the drift on the
vehicles as they exited the last turn and started towards the staging point.
The SRT 10 was the most impressive as it seemed as though it could be held
in the drift the longest.
 
hav yet to do any warranty work on any and there is a conv. with a super
charger on it 's way
 
Art said:
I had to make a joke but apparently sales are pretty bad. Consumer Reports
gave it a thrashing. Basically it supposed to be an archaic Mercedes
design. Mercedes will have a new model with its own badge soon.
Click to expand...

The car has the outgoing CLK chassis which, while not the world's
latest, works quite well. The engine is the same 90 degree, 3 valve/cyl
bent 6 used in everthing from C-Class and E-Class cars to M-Class
SUV's.

If you like the looks of the Crossfire and if you fit the fairly tight
cabin, it is worth considering.
 
Did you hit your head getting into the Crossfire? I did and it still hurts.

But alas, the service manager told me he and some mechanics did the same
thing.

OTOH, the 300 has plenty of head room. I really like the car.

Ken
 
If you like the looks of the Crossfire and if you fit the fairly tight
cabin, it is worth considering.
Click to expand...

That would seem to be a big issue right there. We looked at them
recently and I didn't fit. At 6' 220 I'm a little bigger than average
but geez.. Head bent to the side, knees in the dash board and hips dug
in to the door and console. I don't see how anyone over 5' could fit
in this contraption comfortably.

Steve B.
 
SLK.

CLK is a 4-seater.

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[.........]
The car has the outgoing CLK chassis which, while not the world's
Click to expand...
...............
 
Do you mean you had to 'tap' the gear lever each time to change? I.e. pull
left and release to get 4, pull and release to get 3 etc?

If so, that's standard Merc gear change.

Note that most Merc drivers (in Europe!...) would not dream of drag
starts... :-))

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[.......]
They and the coupe looked smart, rode and drove nicely. I thought the manual
control of the automatic strange as it was pull left to go down a gear, push
right to go up. You had to pull left all the way from Drive, 4, 3, 2, to get
first for a drag start! When you wanted to get into drive you have to push
Click to expand...
[........]
 
Dori said:
SLK.

CLK is a 4-seater.

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[.........]
The car has the outgoing CLK chassis which, while not the world's
Click to expand...
..............
Click to expand...

Yep, SLK. Sorry about that.

On a related note, I just read a test in Autoweek of the SRT-6 which has
the motor from the previous SLK AMG. The main thing they seemed not to
like was the imprecise steering feel due to the car's having
recirculating ball steering rather than rack and pinion. The estimated
0-60 is 5 seconds with auto trans.
 
NJ said:
Did you hit your head getting into the Crossfire? I did and it still
hurts.

But alas, the service manager told me he and some mechanics did the
same thing.

OTOH, the 300 has plenty of head room. I really like the car.

Ken
Click to expand...

No, but I am "vertically challenged" :)

I used to hit my head getting into my Unipower (Mini-Cooper S based special)
but it was only 1.02 metre (40 inches to the roof from the ground).
comparatively the Crossfire is huge!

I do sit reasonable tall (!) and I thought that there wasn't a lot of
headroom. As it was a "jump in and and drive" I didn't spend much time
adjusting the seat - slid it forwards so I could reach the pedals! - so I
don't know whether there is any height and steering wheel adjustment that
might work better for taller folk.

I am not sure that I liked the relatively low seating position of the 300 (I
expect that is adjustable but didn't play with it) as it does seem to make
the car seem very big. If I were in the market, I'd want to experiment with
the driving position adjustments before committing.
 
Dori said:
Do you mean you had to 'tap' the gear lever each time to change?
I.e. pull left and release to get 4, pull and release to get 3 etc?

If so, that's standard Merc gear change.

Note that most Merc drivers (in Europe!...) would not dream of drag
starts... :-))

DAS

[.......]
They and the coupe looked smart, rode and drove nicely. I thought
the manual control of the automatic strange as it was pull left to
go down a gear, push right to go up. You had to pull left all the
way from Drive, 4, 3, 2, to get first for a drag start! When you
wanted to get into drive you have to push [........]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

There was a fully automatic mode (D). If you pull left, you get 4 and it
re-centres. You pull left again and get 3 etc.

So having sidled up to the stop sign in D, it was left (4), left (3), left
(2), left (1) and then hard right foot. At the appropriate spot, push right
to get 2nd. As I was then up to the car in front I wanted to get fully
automatic mode, but needed to do right (3), right (4), right (D) for that.

I don't want this to sound like a big deal. It was only about 1/2 inch
deflection and it was quick.

On the PT cruiser there was another notch rearwards of (D) that put it in
"manual selection mode" and then you use right and left as above. The
benefit of the cruiser approach is that you can go to automatic from any
manually selected gear by moving the lever forwards.

I think the separate gate-area to the side of (D) on the Mazda is more
natural. Then you pull back to go up and push forward to go down. Again at
any time you can go back to automatic.

The other thing I don't recall seeing was whether the selected gear was
displayed in the dash. It was displayed somewhere but iirc it was by the
shifter. Looking down to check the gear status is probably not a good thing,
but you shouldn't need to look often. Again not to try to sell Mazdas, but
they display the gear in the speedo (which I do look at from time to time)
so there us a good reminder if I have left it in 3rd around town.
 
I had to make a joke but apparently sales are pretty bad. Consumer Reports
gave it a thrashing. Basically it supposed to be an archaic Mercedes
design. Mercedes will have a new model with its own badge soon.
Click to expand...

It is based on the MB SLK. No folding hard top for the Crossfire.
 
Alex said:
It is based on the MB SLK. No folding hard top for the Crossfire.
Click to expand...

Whether a Crossfire is "good" or "bad" depends on what you are looking
for. If you want a fire breathing sports car, a Crossfire is not your
car. If you want cool looking (IMO) GT, and if you fit the car
comfortable, the Crossfire could be a good choice.

The Crossfire may be an "archaic" Mercedes-Benz design, but an old MB
design is as good as or better than most other car companies' new
designs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest threads

Back
Top