SLK/R170: SURVEY: Interrested in Crossfire ??
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLK 320
SURVEY: Interrested in Crossfire ??
Is there anyone out there who could think about buying a Chrysler Crossfire now that we know that it's really an SLK with Chrysler body ?????
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,707
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
06 SV650S, 11 Santa Fe
The Crossfire is the first Chrysler I think I've ever liked but I would still much rather have an SLK. It looks alright but there are some components I don't really like. Not to mention its a Chrysler...
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLK 320
Yep ! Same here !
If Crossfire i delivered totally without protection against rust like the other Chryslers then it's propably not a good idea to buy it here in Sweden !
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
A dime store Chrysler body on a chassis that was out of date when it went into production at MB . . . hmmm. . . no thanks. I think I would skip this corporate hand-me-down.
#6
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chandler, Arizona - USA
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'02 SLK32 AMG
Originally posted by adamrs80
The SLK chassis was out of date when it went into production? Please explain this.
The SLK chassis was out of date when it went into production? Please explain this.
The R170 chassis is the 2nd oldest chassis in the M-B linup (next to the G-class).
#7
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chandler, Arizona - USA
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'02 SLK32 AMG
What do you mean "now that we know"? I think we've always known and M-B and Chrysler have both been straightforward about it. Personally, I think the front end is ugly and the back end is twice as ugly as the front.
Otherwise, it's OK
Otherwise, it's OK
![Big Grin](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Trending Topics
#8
wtf, that piece of crap is almost as worse as the SSR Truck hard top convertible that is sold out for the first year. I dont know anyone in their right minds that would buy that ugly retarded looking gimp truck that is convertible. Maybe its for a Hick drunk off his *** and won a 50,000$ scratch ticket and thought he was buying a convertible to show off to his farmer friends. I cant beleive the price is 36K for one of those, they are just ridiculously cheesy and cheap looking mainly due to the chrysler badge on it. The chysler badge makes the Prowler look like crap too.
#9
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SLK Special Edition
I take it you're not from Texas or anywhere near a place with farmers. You should come by sometime and see all the horses, dude ranches, rattlesnakes, sharpshoot'n pistol tote'n rascals, varmits, tumbleweed, and ghost towns. Everybody who's anybody drives an SSR to the honkytonk with its bed chock full of chewing tobbacco, and old beer cans. Now if you'll excuse me Im'a gonna go tell Ma and Pa ga'night before i hit the hay for the evening. tomorrow's my first day as a rodeo clown at the county fair. should be a rootin tootin good ole time. i do hope some day to be sofistahcatid like you though.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Sorry for the late reply, but I’ve been away for a while.
Thank you Brian_170; I agree. The long genesis of the R170 chassis is why it still has re-circulating ball steering (which the press has described as “archaic”), twitchy chassis dynamics, so-so space utilization, and, for my SLK, the feels-like-you’re-breaking-a-chicken-leg-when-you-shift manual transmission. For these reasons, the R170 chassis fails to deliver as a true driver’s car and, for these same reasons, it fails to deliver as a true GT car. The wonderful retractable hardtop makes it much easier to overlook this (it sure did for me). But if you take that away, there’s not much left – no matter what it looks like. IMHO.
- FD
Thank you Brian_170; I agree. The long genesis of the R170 chassis is why it still has re-circulating ball steering (which the press has described as “archaic”), twitchy chassis dynamics, so-so space utilization, and, for my SLK, the feels-like-you’re-breaking-a-chicken-leg-when-you-shift manual transmission. For these reasons, the R170 chassis fails to deliver as a true driver’s car and, for these same reasons, it fails to deliver as a true GT car. The wonderful retractable hardtop makes it much easier to overlook this (it sure did for me). But if you take that away, there’s not much left – no matter what it looks like. IMHO.
- FD
#12
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 Silver SLK
I think MB wants to keep producing that platform long after SLK production ends. From what I saw, under that Chrysler skin IS an SLK 320 right down to the emergency brake lever. The car is being produced to help their Chrysler brand. Chrysler still lags the big three US automakers in quality and MB is trying to change that.
I thought the front end looked cool while the rear end was designed for a boat. It's like MB designed the front end of the car and Chrysler the rear.
My only complaint about the SLK is the lack of rack and pinion feel at the wheel.
Dan
I thought the front end looked cool while the rear end was designed for a boat. It's like MB designed the front end of the car and Chrysler the rear.
My only complaint about the SLK is the lack of rack and pinion feel at the wheel.
Dan
#13
Super Member
The Crossfire seems like a WHY car, not only it a two seater but one with a fixed top? I don't see any point in it, at least the Prowler has a drop top. Remember the premium people were paying for the PT Cruiser...
NP
NP
#14
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SLK Special Edition
In a Chrysler Crossfire add in the October issue of Automobile, it states that the Crossfire will pull 1.1 g on the skid pad. I find that really hard to believe. Anybody want to comment on this?
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
red bicycle
I drove a black-on-black Crossfire with my father a couple weeks ago. The dealer was asking $5K over MSRP.
My impressions:
The Crossfire was a pleasure to drive. Yeah, it may not be the sportiest, but it was fun. It handled great...the added rigidity of the steel roof makes a huge difference. Apprently the Crossfire has the stiffest structure in the class (which I assume includes the 350Z and others). It rode just like a Benz, which should come to no surprise, and was pretty good over bumps considering how well it handled. It would make for good long distance trips.
The car seemed powerful enough, though this is coming from the driver of a C220. And in true Benz tradition, it masks its speed very well. And pop the hood, and aside from the bright silver plastic engine shroud, Benz emblems everywhere.
The clutch/shifter combo took some getting used to. I was never a fan of Mercedes sticks, so it is no different in the Crossfire. But 2 seats and an automatic doesn't compute in my head. We also have a Miata in the family, which I think has the one of the best feeling manuals of any car (BMW included), so that's a tough judge.
It appears much larger in pics...but as you know, it no bigger than the SLK (duh). I personally think that the Crossfire is a good looking car, and I do like the bobtail. And the pop-up spoiler is cool and very well intergated.
Aside from the bits taken directly out of the SLK, the interior was definitely a notch down in quality from a Mercedes, but still much much better than any other Chrysler product (besides the Pacifica). Nicer than the 350Z too. For some reason the window switches are backwards (the top part lowers the window), but that's a minor point. This is also not the car for claustrophobics, as the roof slopes down (which also may be a problem for tall people...like 6' 3" me) and the windows are tiny.
That's my opinion. As a car nut, it's worth the trip to the Chrysler dealer just to check it out.
My impressions:
The Crossfire was a pleasure to drive. Yeah, it may not be the sportiest, but it was fun. It handled great...the added rigidity of the steel roof makes a huge difference. Apprently the Crossfire has the stiffest structure in the class (which I assume includes the 350Z and others). It rode just like a Benz, which should come to no surprise, and was pretty good over bumps considering how well it handled. It would make for good long distance trips.
The car seemed powerful enough, though this is coming from the driver of a C220. And in true Benz tradition, it masks its speed very well. And pop the hood, and aside from the bright silver plastic engine shroud, Benz emblems everywhere.
The clutch/shifter combo took some getting used to. I was never a fan of Mercedes sticks, so it is no different in the Crossfire. But 2 seats and an automatic doesn't compute in my head. We also have a Miata in the family, which I think has the one of the best feeling manuals of any car (BMW included), so that's a tough judge.
It appears much larger in pics...but as you know, it no bigger than the SLK (duh). I personally think that the Crossfire is a good looking car, and I do like the bobtail. And the pop-up spoiler is cool and very well intergated.
Aside from the bits taken directly out of the SLK, the interior was definitely a notch down in quality from a Mercedes, but still much much better than any other Chrysler product (besides the Pacifica). Nicer than the 350Z too. For some reason the window switches are backwards (the top part lowers the window), but that's a minor point. This is also not the car for claustrophobics, as the roof slopes down (which also may be a problem for tall people...like 6' 3" me) and the windows are tiny.
That's my opinion. As a car nut, it's worth the trip to the Chrysler dealer just to check it out.
Last edited by whatup?; 09-15-2003 at 05:47 PM.
#19
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chandler, Arizona - USA
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'02 SLK32 AMG
Saw a Crossfire in person for the first time on Thursday. It was black. Still think it's ugly, but it looks better in black because black helps hide it's ugly lines.
Does it have a "poser button" for the spoiler? I noticed that the spoiler was up when the car was parked and I thought it was supposed to be automatic. Lame.
Does it have a "poser button" for the spoiler? I noticed that the spoiler was up when the car was parked and I thought it was supposed to be automatic. Lame.
#22
Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Central VA, USA
Posts: 146
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'01 ML430, '03 C320 Coupe MT, '14 GL450
Originally posted by Brian_R170
Does it have a "poser button" for the spoiler? I noticed that the spoiler was up when the car was parked and I thought it was supposed to be automatic. Lame.
Does it have a "poser button" for the spoiler? I noticed that the spoiler was up when the car was parked and I thought it was supposed to be automatic. Lame.
I took one for a test drive, and personally I quite like the look of it. I like the big wheels.
Driving it was no surprise, and it drove very much like our SLK. The trunc looks a lot smaller than the SLK's though, which is strange for a coupe. I found the stick shift adequate. Keep in mind that I'm not a fast-and-furious wannabee, and a test drive on public roads is also not the best place to explore a car's performance limits.
#23
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2000 230 Sport
Interested in Crossfire?
I'm the proud owner of a beloved SLK, (and I'll never give it up) but the Crossfire just got more interesting. How does a version with the AMG supercharged V6 grab you? How about a convertible? How about a Crossfire Convertible with the AMG supercharged V6? It's called SRT-6, and your local dealer s/b able to order it right about now...