Pacifica

  • Thread starter Thread starter Art Begun
  • Start date Start date
A

Art Begun

Test drove it again today. In fact drove it into my garage to check
the fit. Pretty tight but do-able.

3 complaints:
1. low power (we all knew that already)
2. checked out the location of the spare tire underneath the car.
Part of the rear AWD suspension was already rusting. Some kind of arm
from the center to the left wheel full of rust
3. Check out the way the side mirrors are mounted. I know it is nice
that they turn on impact instead of breaking off but look at how (not)
the top of the triangle is fastened to the car.
 
You still didn't answer the question as to what price would tempt you to
buy...

DAS
 
They are advertising $6k off some of the loaded models. I think that
is a reasonable deal. What is holding me up is deciding what to do
with my 2001 Avalon..... whether to try selling it privately or take
a bigger hit and trade it in.
 
In the past couple of weeks I've seen a fair number of these on the road.
From a distance it looks like a regular Chrysler min-van. Up close it
looks like a mini-van that someone chopped down 6 inches or so.
 
Egads....250hp and almost a thousand pounds HEAVIER than the 300M (which
isn't that quick either). Low power is an understatement. The only real
saving grace here (in terms of desirable features) is the AWD, though there
are other cars in this price range with AWD and better performance/handling.
I don't get it. What am I missing?

Too bad they can't just put that AWD drivetrain in the 300M. THEN they'd
have something. How a lineup of underpowered, overpriced and (in my opinon)
ugly vehicles in their premium lineup is supposed to improve profitability
leaves me scratching my head. I'll be hanging on to my crusty old 300M for
a while it
seems.

Cheers,

C
 
Art said:
I was looking at the new 300M's on the lot. The fit and finish left a
but to be desired...
Click to expand...

Art - Did you misspell "Butt"? (just kidding - one of those funny
typos) 8^)

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
 
Alex said:
In the past couple of weeks I've seen a fair number of these on the road.
From a distance it looks like a regular Chrysler min-van. Up close it
looks like a mini-van that someone chopped down 6 inches or so.
-----------------
Click to expand...

Its a station wagon. So is the Murano and its Infinity equivalent.

Fine by me, I like them a lot better than minivans (although the
Murano's stying makes it among the ugliest cars I've ever seen).

The Pacifica is really growing on me, at least styling-wise. I'd love to
see this class of car drive the minivan out of the market.
 
Steve said:
Its a station wagon. So is the Murano and its Infinity equivalent.

Fine by me, I like them a lot better than minivans (although the
Murano's stying makes it among the ugliest cars I've ever seen).

The Pacifica is really growing on me, at least styling-wise. I'd love to
see this class of car drive the minivan out of the market.
Click to expand...

I may be dense, but as far as I can tell, the Pacifica is a mini van - just
squished down a little bit and with conventional doors instead of sliding doors
(like the older Mazada MPVs).

The only way a Pacifica would "grown on me" if it cost a whole lot less and had
a lot better performance.

Regards,

Ed White
 
Agreed.

I still like this car and am wondering if I should of purchased one. I'm
glad I didn't only because I would've paid top dollar for it. Art has
already found that there are offering up to 6K off the sticker.

Ken
 
Chris said:
Too bad they can't just put that AWD drivetrain in the 300M.
THEN they'd have something.
Click to expand...

They'd have a pile of shit. You've got to be kidding. AWD in a sedan
is useless. The extra mechanicals does not pay for itself in terms of
performance when you count the extra space, weight, up-front cost, and
down-the-road maintenance costs.

Acceleration from a standing start will not benefit from AWD (not
enough to suit me anyways). AWD is a marketing gimmick that is
designed to lighten your walled by a few thousand up front and a few
more down the road. I had great snows on my 300 this past winter, and
we had a BITCH of a winter, and I had no trouble getting around.

I'll take a winter performance hit with RWD for the handfull of days
when I get on the road before the snow plows get to them if it means
better acceleration for the other 300-odd days of the year.

Give me the current 300M in RWD. They you'll see 0-60 numbers be much
better. I dare anyone to find a set of tires that hold the road
during a pedal-stomping start. There's simply too much weight
transfer to the back to see good 0-60 times with FWD.
 
I'll take the next one (300C) with Hemi V-8, RWD and better
styling.
Click to expand...

If you had a choice between the pending LX-based 300C and the 2-door
RWD concept shown at the 2000 Detroit Auto show, which would you
choose?
 
MoPar said:
If you had a choice between the pending LX-based 300C and the 2-door
RWD concept shown at the 2000 Detroit Auto show, which would you
choose?
Click to expand...

If you are speaking of the 300 Hemi C convertible, I would choose that if it
was just between those two, but if you also gave me the choice of the Chronos I
would choose that model. I have always liked the 1953 d'Elegance, the 1952
C-200 and the 1951 K-310. As those designs inspired the Chronos and the pending
300C, you now know why I like the new model. The Hemi V-8 and RWD just make it
that more appealing to me.
 
I may be dense, but as far as I can tell, the Pacifica is a mini van - just
squished down a little bit and with conventional doors instead of sliding doors
(like the older Mazada MPVs).
Click to expand...

Well, most buyers of SUVs would be better served by minivans (better fuel
economy, safer, better ride and handling, more passenger and cargo space), but
don't want to be seen in them. So a "minivan" that looks like an SUV seems
the perfect vehicle.
 
They'd have a pile of shit. You've got to be kidding. AWD in a sedan
is useless. The extra mechanicals does not pay for itself in terms of
performance when you count the extra space, weight, up-front cost, and
down-the-road maintenance costs.
Click to expand...

Generally awd in a passenger car is sold on the basis of safety and winter
ability, not performance. See Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Volvo, ...
 
MoPar said:
For what it's worth, the Murano has a CVT...
Click to expand...

That doesn't help its ugliness any, though. What it needs is styling-
especially on the front end (at least I think that's supposed to be the
front, but people might be driving 'em in reverse so they look better.)

:-)
 
MoPar said:
RPhillips47 wrote:





If you had a choice between the pending LX-based 300C and the 2-door
RWD concept shown at the 2000 Detroit Auto show, which would you
choose?
Click to expand...

My favorite was actually the 4-door (the two rear doors were almost
invisible) Charger concept car. THAT was a beautiful design.
 
Steve said:
That doesn't help its ugliness any, though. What it needs is
styling- especially on the front end (at least I think that's
supposed to be the front, but people might be driving 'em in
reverse so they look better.)
Click to expand...

The Murano does look like it's missing a front bumper.
 
The $6k off is for loaded models.



NJ Vike said:
Agreed.

I still like this car and am wondering if I should of purchased one. I'm
glad I didn't only because I would've paid top dollar for it. Art has
already found that there are offering up to 6K off the sticker.

Ken

the
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest threads

Back
Top