Chrysler 300C V E320 CDI

[bpsorrel]

A Good mate of mine has a dilemma, which I couldn't advise on, so I thought I'd throw it out to you guys!

He has around £11K to spend and wants an "executive" car to replace his aging S Type.

So, he's nailed it down to a 30,000 mile 2008 Chrysler 300C 3 litre diesel and a 60,000 mile 2005 E320 cdi.

Both cars appeal (in different ways!). On the face of it, Chrysler seems like a bargain. So, would it really be a worse car for the money than the E320?

My view was, choose the car you like best, whatever badge is on it....

 

[renault12ts]

Agreed, choose the one that floats your boat.

 

[MicB]

Antijam and Wheels1 have 300C's and I am sure would be prepared to offer objective comparisons.

Mic

 

[Ted]

Heart says Chrysler, head says Merc.

These days, for me it's the head that wins every time. (so says the bloke with two convertibles and a motorbike)

If he's under 40 go for the Chrysler
If he's over 40 go for the Mercedes.

 

[bpsorrel]

Does anyone know about the reliability (or not!) of the 300C? Does it suffer the same issues as a 211?

 

[renault12ts]

Same engine. Mercedes underpinnings (almost). Probably less rust on the Chrysler.

 

[bpsorrel]

I know Crossfires have rust issues, so maybe 300Cs do too... don't know much about them other than one of my clients has one and he loves the attention he gets!

 

[Deleted member 37751]

The only person I know that's had a 300C was pretty happy with it.

Interior was very American, plasticky, and he ended up feeling a bit embarrassed driving it due to it's 'gangster' image.

He replaced it with a 212 E350 CDi.....

 

[corned]

Certainly the 300s I have hired in the USA have been nothing short of appalling. Terrible build quality, and shoddy/cheap materials. Not something I would recommend. When I get back home and get back into my 211 at the airport car park, it gives the impression that I have leapt forward 30 years.

The UK spec 300s may be different, of course.

 

[Monkeylegend]

One has class,style,performance,economy,is a nice place to sit, generally reliable,good resale value, the other is a Chrysler.

I do quite a bit of work with Americans, and when I told them I was thinking about the 300C they immediately said forget it if you want reliability, build integrity, and longevity. In their opinion most American cars were built to fall apart at 100k miles. Maybe a bit if an exaggeration, but they were less than complimentary about the Chrysler.

 

[crockers]

Tell him to test both - drive them hard around an empty roundabout and then decide. Would be amazed if he then chose the Chrysler..unless he like Quells that is.

 

[st13phil]

Certainly the 300s I have hired in the USA have been nothing short of appalling. Terrible build quality, and shoddy/cheap materials.

Matches my experience precisely.

 

[BTB 500]

A few people on here have bought 300s before and not kept them long.

There are some previous threads too e.g.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/spotted-ebay/79306-cheap-chrysler-300cs.html

 

[Mr E]

The 300C goes well in a straight line.......

That's about it as far as positives go - when I test drove one I rejected it on the grounds of handling (I live in the sticks and need to go round corners), brakes (it didn't stop), build quality (imagine with "wood" elements being made of melted NHS tortoiseshell glasses...), comfort (you got thrown around as the seats gave no grip and support)... I 'll stop there.

I do like the looks though, and found that people got out of the way (although that could have been out of fear if they knew how bad the brakes were).

 

[st13phil]

I rejected it on the grounds of handling (I live in the sticks and need to go round corners)

I had a rental 300C in the USA last November and took a freeway exit at what I thought was an appropriate speed. Oh dear. Fortunately my view of "appropriate speed" and the car's ability weren't so far apart as to require the laundry service, but it was a real eye (and other things) opener

 

[A210AMG]

There are two Colleagues at work with 300C estates.

I quite like the look 'outside' however inside they are Jeep plastic looking with blanks and you can see how its been screwed togther. Fact it in America the best one was probably £20k new so its all down to cost.

Also the boot in the estate is VERY high and nothing like as big as the merc. OOh and the load cover is a flimsy piece of matterial which you have to manually pull across...





I could understand the appeal, half the millage and newer car but for me I would rather have the Merc (and I'm under 40)

 

[Adam230K]

I'm still in my 20's and i'd rather have the merc.

 

[artyman]

I would imagine with a 2005 Merc the depreciation would be less than the newer 300, and apart from that the Merc is a much nicer car. If he's worried about the age stick a personalised plate on it.

 

[Peterr_ibg]

300C

There was a facelift in 2008 which , IMHO, greatly improved the interior - dark leather instead of light grey.

Things to look out for :-

Swirl Motor, oil drips lead to failure and expensive to fix (£1,000+) - Chrysler were fixing under warranty , but those outside could have a big bill waiting - the problem can be avoided by fitting a catch can.

Wheel corrosion - many have had real problems with corrosion of the alloys . I'm awaiting my third set!

Merc platform , Merc based engine and 5 speed autobox. - Ok doesn't corner on rails, but suspension on Euro version better than USA model

 

[bpsorrel]

Thanks guys! I'll pass your comments on and leave him to decide!

As far as I know, he's testing the 300C tomorrow....