In yesterday's auto section of the sunday paper there was an article on the new Chrysler Crossfire. Says that Mercedes accounts for about 39 percent of the components and systems in the Crossfire, including engine, transmission and suspension from the SLK and CLK. The 300C, the replacement for the 300M (due out in 2005) will have 15 percent of its parts and components from Mercedes. I remember reading an article about a month ago which stated that Mercedes wanted to turn Chrysler into more of an "upscale" car maker. I guess thats good for Chrysler owners. As a Mercedes owner I better not start seeing Chrysler parts on a MB. I think it waters down the MB marquee (trying not to be a snob). If you look at the Crossfire it has the identical "grill" on the front quarter panel as does the new SL. I'd be interested to hear everyone else's take on this.
chris

 

Personally, it causes me no problems. MB has been a wide-range manufactirer in Europe--our E Class is often a taxi there, and they have the A class as well as the Smart, and Mitsubishi in Japan. They have said all along that they would not use Chrysler parts on MB, but would do the opposite and would share design and technology ideas. I seem to recall Chrysler had an innovative method of designing seat assemblies, one that MB planned to use. Since the German folks are clearly in the driver's seat, I am sure they understand the value of their marque. But the Crossfire opens new territory for Chrysler and I'm glad to see it.

 

I think in general it will be OK. I was always a little skeptical about this union, and it has been very difficult for both companies. It is nice to finally see some products that take advantage of this union.

If you notice, it is sharing what are now old components. The engine is the 3.2L (AFAIK), and now MB will be putting the improved engine in the MB vehicles. The interior is a silver version of the old C.

I don't think that MB is going to degrade their image by sharing any major componentry. Maybe MB will share things like the cupholders, that are not that important and that an American car company actually does right.

 

quote from autoweek
http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=03142700

sharing parts will upgrade the quality of Chrysler cars and reduce the cost of MB cars. I think the quality of car is from the workers (workmanship) not the brands. e.g. the quality of US made ML is not as good as the quality of her German sisters. (I respect US workers but fact is fact.)

 

In essence, there is nothing particularly wrong with US workers when it comes to building automobiles. Consider that the Accord and Camry are both built in the US, and are both two of the most reliable cars.

Having said that, the MB parts will give Chrysler some much needed refinement. And if MB can get some cost savings and pump more in to R&D, that is good, too.

 

As are the Mercedes Benz ML and the SLK, as well as the BMW Z4 and the X5... in the case of the BMWs, those are for WORLD WIDE consumption, not just US.

 

CUP HOLDERS AND KEYLESS ENTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I took a test drive today in a new Chrysler Pacifica AWD. If you wonder whether Chrysler is learning from MB, take a drive and look at the execution. The NAV system is very nice, occupies the cutout space in the speedometer, but I'm not conversant enough in NAV to comment on features. Overall the Pacifica is a very nice package.

 

OK, are you saying Chrysler is learning from MB or not? Pacifica has nav/ E's do not. Pacificas are nice compared to what in the MB? Can you address the execution?

 

Yes, I think Chrysler is learning important things--the feel of the switchgear, design of window switches and seat controls, firmer seats, solid drive feel and quiet. As I said, a nice package. I am not comparing it to my E, they're different cars. But the interior has a fit and finish much better than past Chryslers and things like the seat controls and windows could be right out of the MB bin, the body panels also are uniformly fit, and Pacifica adds things like power lumbar, power pedals, but the steering wheel is manually tilted but adequate. As I said, the NAV is nice, I don't know what people need in that feature, but it had a very clean map and logical controls. It said turn by turn directions are not available in my area(not surprising, we are very rural) but even short connecting streets showed on the map. The programmable dash items like our MultiFunction control are more complete--more options to set. It feels like a mini-van but lower and much more solid. "Minivan" is the impression I have had when I drove a ML320, too. I would look at the Pacifica if I was in the AWD or 2WD crossover/SUV market.

 

Good description, thanks......

 

Major Mercedes Components
German car
good perfermance
good for money, MSRP $33620

 

I attended a Crossfire driving event and was impressed with the car except for two reasons.
First - The rear design makes visibility terrible. It is worse than most convertibles.
Second - They said if you want one the dealers are adding $5000 to the sticker. This means you are paying $40,000 for a Chrysler SLK. As to the rear quarter visibility problem I was told that within a yera they will have the retractable roof like the CLK

 

Funny thing, I just stopped by a Chrysler dealer last weekend when I saw they had a Crossfire parked outside.

It's unbelievable the number of interior bits they've used from Mercedes parts. I used to have a W210 E-class, and just sitting in the c.ockpit of the car, I realized how many little pieces they re-used. The mirror controls, the hazard signal switch, the turn signal stalk, the cruise control stalk, the headlight switch -- all straight ouf of the W210. I don't even know what parts they've "reused" from the other MB models. And Mercedes isn't trying too hard to hide the lineage of the Crossfire -- in the trunk, there is an air compressor for the run flat tires, and it's a straight-up Mercedes part, wrapped in the typical Mercedes parts-bag. Under the hood you see the "star" on a ton of parts, with some parts starting with "W203" or "203" (don't remember whether the W was there of not).

I didn't get a chance to drive it, but it certainly seems like MB is sending its old parts to Chrysler. Which doesn't bother me at all -- now if I see the current signal stalk from the W211 E-class end up in that car, I'll start being concerned!

 

well, like mb said, 'in a perfect world, everyone would drive a mercedes.' maybe this is how.

part of the chrysler group is dodge and jeep. do they share parts as well?

when i bought the e, i didn't know this association. my fault for not researching mb as a company. i've always
heard that mb builds a great and reliable product. more and more, i feel i'm driving a car designed for mass
market appeal using cheaper and cheaper parts/engineering. they look great, but am i driving an expensive very
fast piece of pretty plastic? my doors side body panels flap when you shut them. my trunk is engineered with big
yo-yo springs that closes with any gust of wind. they can't get all the electronics working together at the same
time. radio goes out for no reason, then comes back on. wipers noise. right drift. teleaid malfunctions. when
making a call from the $1500 mb phone, people say it sounds like i'm in a tunnel and ask me to use my other (not
mb) $200 cell phone. no full spare tire w/ rim for a 60k car. blinding reading lamps for rear passengers. side
mirrors are not tinted for glare. i got cheap loud cont tires (finally dealer replaced mich pilots sport after 8500
miles restricted to grandma driving). transmission engages to r and d very hard (very much like a ford or maybe
chrysler, never owned one). i know this sounds like i hate the car but i don't. it's just my mercedes expectations
have been adjusted greatly after driving this car for 4 months and 10 trips to the dealer since then. for this kind of
money, i expect a more solid car and way fewer problems. i now know 2 service advisors, 2 mechanics, and a
shop foreman on a first name basis trying to fix this car and make it drive and work like a mercedes.

the thought of someone else buying another car for 20k less using the same parts, last years parts or current
parts (and who knows what part we don't see), does bother me.

 

Doesn't bother me. I rented a 2004 Chrysler Concorde this past weekend. The only obvious similarity was the headlight switch which was good since Chrysler doesn't illuminate the switch or the settings and it was only because I knew the switch that I could find and set it easily.

Otherwise, it was a load and took a lot of effort to keep on the road at high speeds. Grossly inferior to all of the MBs I've driven.

 

are they crazy?

2004 crossfire price

specifications

While "troublesome" ML is made in USA, Crossfiire is being built at the Karmann factory in Germany, which is the same place the Mercedes SLK and CLK are built. (not only sharing parts, but sharing "workmanship" as well -- good for the quality.)

 

Last time I checked Chrysler was comfortably ahead of MB in the latest JD Powers survey.

Maybe it's the Chrysler product owners who should have something to worry about parts sharing!

 

i went to checkout the crossfire 3 weeks ago, we didnt drive it or anything, but it was cool....the overall look wasnt to appealing to me though, i also thought it was a little overpriced.

 

parts sharing proof?

e rims vs dodge stratus rims

 

Lets ALL get down on one knee and pray that Kirk Kerkorian is successful !!

http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswi...tr1166437.html

 

I don't care of there are shared parts. I don't think Chryslers are going to turn in MBs so fast. They are smart enough to maintain the different brand identities that appeal to different kinds of buyers. If it helps reduce costs and allows MB to stay competitive, why not. Did anyone think that the purchase of Chrysler was simply going to mean German ownership without some degree of economic integration on the production side?

 

honda has these on the accord also.

 

thats because it shares no MB engineering or parts. its an old platform thats soon to be replaced.

 

Latest: "Mr. Kerkorian testified that DaimlerChrysler Chairman Juergen Schrempp wouldn't meet with him, didn't return his phone calls and ignored him." Sound familiar?