What he said! ^^^

 

I am usually drawn to rare, outlying cars. I've always liked cars from Packard, Nash, Hudson, Studebaker, etc. - things you don't see everyday.
This is what initially drew me to the Crossfire (along with the looks of it).
It is rare (1 of 928, and rare to see another Crossfire of any kind around here), has great art deco styling, is made well, is fast, and both my wife and I agreed it was the car for us.

I am not concerned with what the badges say. It is essentially a Karmann built Mercedes with a Chrysler shell. And that is good enough for me.

 

Haha Send me a pic I'll make one!

 

I guess my logic is a little different - I almost didn't buy the XF because of it's MB heritage. I plan on keeping this car a long time. Unlike others on this forum, my MB experience has been terrible. I owned a 190SL that was a bucket of bolts. I served in Germany for many tours and the sedans I rented and owned over there were the same (MB in Germany is like Chevy here; the cheapest taxis are MB). The maintenance records of the late 90's and early 00's MB have been abysmal and the S series lately has been the same(some good articles in Forbes) only exceeded by the 7 series BMW's. In short, the possible reliability of the car was a major drawback. I have owned cars I had to pour thousands into and I didn't want this to be another one.

Luckily, I like to research and I found this forum. Your comments seemed to indicate the maintenance was at least average. Also, I found a Consumer Report that indicated that the XF reliablity was better than average. Later, I found other articles that indicated that the XF wasn't as bad as the rest of the MB fleet.

Of course, once I drove it - that was it!

 

Yeah, no kidding. I don't know anyone that has driven an SRT-6 that didn't want to buy it.

 

Tom, sure you do. We had dinner together at Quaker Steak & Lube just a couple of months ago.

 

You've driven one, and DON'T want one? Aw, come on, forget price and insurance and all that jazz, you seriously wouldn't want one?!?

 

Tom, my Wife and I test drove a SSB, SRT6 last spring and really liked it. I didn't even notice the suspension being that much firmer either, but I was on some fairly smooth roads.
When I had the opportunity to lay into it from a dead stop, it almost felt like my Viper. Not quite as ferocious for the first 60' but after it got moving it blurred the scenery much the same way.
But the biggest thing I missed was the manual tranny, and I really don't need a car that fast anymore.(not that I ever did)
After I bought the Viper, I thought to myself, where I do I go from here? I'll never be able to afford another car that I'd like as much. Then I bought my Crossfire, and I haven't driven the Viper since.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I know I'd be getting into a lot more trouble if I had a SRT. In the Viper, most everybody is too intimidated to even challenge you, so you never even have to go over the speed limit. But in a SRT I know every yahoo out there would want to see what ya got, and I don't need that kind of temptation anymore.
I know I'm going to regret not getting one someday, because eventually I think the SRT is going to be discovered, and turn into a "cult" car much like the Mark IV Supra Turbo's, and the Buick Grand Nationals are today.
But for now, I'm perfectly content with my "NA" 6spd. and I really don't want an SRT. But then again, that could all change after I sell my Viper too.

 

Do you have any information on the Consumers Report Issue or was it in their yearly car issue?
Thanks

 

I just tried to download the report from on line and the system won't accept it.

It is in the on line version currently. The 2005 prediction is better than average (their best rating). This is in the same category as most of the Toyotas.

 

I don't think my car is a Chrysler, and I don't think it's a Mercedes... It's the first true DC car and I hope they collaborate more like this. The 300c enjoys some of the benefits of Mercedes, but not anywhere near the level the X-Fire does. And I don't know of any Mercedes that has Chrysler parts, design, or engineering.

It's sort of like the original first two generations of the Eclipse/Talon/Laser. Those cars were *NOT* Mitsubishi/Eagle/Plymouth cars, they were DSM's (Diamond Star Motors). It was a true collaboration of manufacturers coming together to create a more superior product than any one of them could have done on their own.

To me this is exactly what the X-Fire is, a true collaboration car that got the best of both worlds. MB Engineering, Chrysler Styling and Karmann build quality. Chrysler didn't have a hope of making this car on their own, Karmann doesn't have the capital to undertake a project like this on their own, and MB, well, they wouldn't ever think to create a car like this on their own.

 

I wish it was a Ford. The engine of this car is a disgrace but not for quality or reliability but for performance. A car like this with it's looks and sportscar image having a 3.2L engine with a miserly 215 hp and needing premium gas, and the relatively lousy gas mileage for its weight, is just wrong. And the stupid pretense to have two sparkplugs but only three valves on a SOHC engine rather having the extra valve, in place of the useless extra plug, and have the DOHC setup.
Don't talk to me about superchargers, the basic performance underpinings of this engine sucks, it's still a pig under those fancy clothes. To get more technical on the two plugs: The two sparkplugs might contribute to lesser performance (OK, but more reliability) because there are two(!) flamefronts during combustion, and where the two meet, there will be some cancellation of each other, hence reducing force and efficiency. Someone said airplane engines have two plugs; yes, that's true, but it's for reliability, not performance.
There are 3.0L naturally aspirated V6 DOHC with 225hp or (higher) engines, running on regular gas getting 30 mpg (or better) mileage with 5 sp. auto transmission in same but usually higher weight cars.
In sum, the car is sweet in every aspect, but this engine just doesn't belong there.

 

LOL, thank God it is not a Ford, or I never would have bought one!

Just curious, Banjoman, why did you buy the car if you hate the power plant so much?

 

WoW, I'm with Tom2112. I'm almost afraid to ask why you bought it. Did you ever find the salesman that lied to you about the engine before you discovered it yourself? I wouldn't want to be him!

 

People, people I think the whole point is moot. MB & Chyrsler were the same company at the time our cars were built. It isn't a Chysler or a Benz, it's the child of an weird union now severed; a Chrybenz, if you will.

 

You can pretend until the radio flashes CHRYSLER...Seems the corporation anticipated the desire for people to distance themselves from the domestic market.

i don't really care what people think their car is.

All I am concerned with is the quality, service and reliability

 

That's a good one! But I like Benzler.

Or how about Chrycedes? LOL

 

+1 for "Benzler Crossfire." Who needs the three heads of Cerberus when we have this forum to make these critical decisions?

 

Mine is a Chyrsler.....
If I wanted a MB I would have bought one.

But then again a Vette is my next car. :-)

 

You left out the proper response...I pretend my Benz is a Chrysler.