Comments on: Chrysler kills the PT Cruiser

By: Wheelnut®™

Wheelnut®™ — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 10:17:17 +0000

The sad thing about the PT Cruiser is that Chrysler didn’t take advantage of the Dailer-Chrysler and all the Merc-Benzs experience etc

Which meant that the “Cruiser” was left with an under-powered engine and typically poor US build quality [just like the Crossfire].

If only it had a similar engine suspension and interior to that of an CLC Class Coupe for example it could have been a better more popular retro car

The other thing is why didn’t they release the PT mini pick-up in Australia? It looks so much better than the convertible

By: MONMEL

MONMEL — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:23:03 +0000

Yeah…so easy to be negative!! Truly harder to think of positive comments to make, isn’t it?. It’s a shame Chrysler has put itself in the financial mess it’s in. However, we truly love our ‘07 PT Cruiser convertible. It looks nothing like the COMMON LOOK-ALIKE cars available today…talk about a car with real character! If anyone wants a car that stands out from the mundane offerings available today, then a CRUISER would fit the bill very well. It may not be the ‘perfect’ car…but which one is??

So all you knockers, if it makes you feel ‘warm and fuzzy’, keep on knocking. Perhaps you need to do this to make yourself feel important, however, it probably means your negative comments mean nothing in the grand scheme of things anyway.

By: JiveTalkin

JiveTalkin — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:43:00 +0000

I love the look of the PT Cruiser and the space inside. I would have liked a V6 engine instead of the 4Cyl. I’ve been saving for one for several years and now that I can afford one there going to Kill It. It’s the best biggest small car ever and I want one. Not now however, the allmighty $$GOD has spoken. A company without a Backbone is not one to be in partnersnip with.

By: Guy Lomas

Guy Lomas — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:14:56 +0000

I happen to own a black 06 Chrysler PT Cruiser Classic. It’s a damn shame that they are finishing up with so many lovely models of cars in their stable. Ah well. all this means is that the cars that are out there will become collector items.. (Rubbing hands greedily. “God I hope so!”) The only issue I have is getting parts.. I just hope I can still get parts… Guy.

By: Hairy

Hairy — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:13:41 +0000

Those who live and breathe money, only know about money and shareholders and nothing much else. I don’t think i’ve even seen an accountant smile.If it wasn’t for inventors, engineers and the like, they would be back to where they should be ….in caves counting shells.Money eventually will kill common sense.

By: RX8...that's RX

RX8...that's RX — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:52:57 +0000

So???!!!

By: Frugal One

Frugal One — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:53:25 +0000

Frankly i could not care if Chrysler falls over and dies.

They treated us with contempt when they shut up shop in Oz, i dont forget, they can go to hell.

The REAL funny thing is the $20-billion+ tear-up Benz did when they owned it [Could/nt happen to a nicer company!]

Cheers

F-0 [VOTE NOW!]

By: Reckless1

Reckless1 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:43:39 +0000

The impact on Australian motorists will be zero….same as the care factor.

By: wheelnut

wheelnut — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 09:28:35 +0000

Frugal One: There’s still the Challenger; Viper; and the RAM Pick-Up.

The Challenger would be the most suitable rival to the Camaro/Monaro and Mustang all due in 2010-12 which is why
if Dodge Chrysler plan to stay in Oz they must make it in RHD or at least make it so the conversion [done here] has Factory approval/backing

After all there are a lot of people who love Mopar Hemis and Chargers it’s just over the past couple of years Dodge/Chrysler have been building some of the ugliest and uninspiring cars around.

By: Fred

Fred — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:39:48 +0000

This retro-looking car just didn’t have the appeal the current Ford Mustang has.

By: Bubba Ganush

Bubba Ganush — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:25:49 +0000

I think it is a good idea to axe the PT Cruiser

That car was a let down from the start i had the impression it was gonna be bigger, then when one arrived in the country i thought “man i could put this in my pocket and walk out of the showroom and no one would know”.

most of the new chrysler line up are nothing but colonary abortions they should have named the 300c the valiant regal!

By: Myke

Myke — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 05:52:51 +0000

At the end of these major changes, I have a feeling that only the 300C will be left in the Chrysler line-up, not such a bad thing though.

By: Casey

Casey — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 05:18:56 +0000

I think that car had seen out its life cycle. It wasn’t my idea of a good looking car, far from it, but it seemed to fill a niche (as most Chryslers do).

Perhaps they’re going to try and be more mainstream from now on?

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:13:26 +0000

Well, at least one US manufacturer is stopping the stupid badge engineering they do.

By: Supercujo

Supercujo — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 01:28:21 +0000

No great loss really…

A car that was decent (if you can forgive the breathless 2.2 and 3sp auto) when it was first released, but thanks to zero updates in its 7 year life other than chrome strips and paint colours it has aged far from gracefully. Oh, it did finally get a 4sp auto back in 2006.

By: Godspeed

Godspeed — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 01:24:32 +0000

The 300C is selling well as far as I know. I’d consider one if I was looking for a big, fast, cheap sedan.

If Chrysler still includes Dodge and Jeep, then Jeep are also doing ok but I personally dunno why you’d buy a Dodge Nitro. the advertising is terrible and says nothing about the car, which, presumably, is telling us about the car…

By: Frugal One

Frugal One — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 01:19:14 +0000

“The company has started by axing poor performing models”

That was missing from the above!

Cheers

F-0

By: Frugal One

Frugal One — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 01:17:31 +0000

*****PRIMO!*****

>>>

LOL

They will then have NOTHING to sell! :-)

Cheers

F-0