That is the art deco styling coming through. Many of the cars of the 20s and 30s had swooping, split window designs.

Ok, we need to get away from the muscle car thing. It's not a Mustang or a Camaro. Those cars are special, but the Xfire is something else. It's a sophisticated, light, powerful, boutique-type car. It needs to have awe-inspiring, almost shockingly interesting, beautiful styling that reaches back to a time in automobile history when car bodies were hand built and designed especially for the buyer.

The performance needs to match the looks. The SRT6 should have been the standard Crossfire, followed by a more powerful (perhaps larger supercharger pulley) special version. The original Crossfire came out with high expectations, but quickly cooled due to the lack of power. It faded into the shadows because it was, well, boring compared to the competition (performance-wise).

If a new one was to exist, it would need to fill a niche like no other and would need to use modern, sophisticated technoligy wrapped up in an art deco-inspired, sleek body.

Cheers Eric!

 

Your sure asking for a lot there Cgocifer. I had a vintage 30' car with a split window. It cranked out for ventilation, but there was no triangle at the base. It is more than that I think.


As to the underpowered thing, all the SRT guys say more, MORE MORE power. My wimpy little roadster handles itself quite respectedly. And don't forget, I have a 400HP SRT in the garage as well. Frankly all that smoke from the short life rear tires is a problem. Some of us drive daily. Too much muscle can be tedious.

Eric. Are we looking at one car or two extremes of one design? If it's one car, the market for a bruising high HP screamer is narrow. On the other hand a cute but wimpy toy will go the way of the Sky and the MG midget.

Sharing the same body doesn't make the Limited less desireable than the SRT, as the market has shown. So, unless you are building a true exotic, one dream machine version would not likely be economically feasable. Not at $35K

The current Xfire is an excellent, crisp design. But it gets the "sweet boy" and the "cute" label from time to time. It could use a little muscular meat on it. If it is a pit bull, then it should look like it.

My humble opinion.

roadster with a stick

 

Eric, it's nice to see you still have a place in your heart for the Crossfire.

 

Ditto! I'd like to see photos of Eric's own Crossfire. More so to know if the Creator left the production Crossfire stock or made modifications to make it look more his original concept.

 

The drawings remind me a bit of the Maybach Exelero... the edger design and such.

Eric you’re probably going to get sick of all the questions real quick… so I’ll only ask a few

Man now that’s a bit of information I could have done with out… so just by adding the spoiler is dropped it .6?

If I remember correctly the spoiler adds 37ish lbs of down force at 80mph…

Yeah post some pics!

Eric glad to see that new ideas and designs keep coming years down the road. I think I speak for a lot of us when I say the Crossfire is one car that down the road may or may not be collectable but, one things for sure, it’ll still be one damn fine looking ride.

Jason L

 

Eric, My dream car as a teenager wasn't a muscle car, it was the XKE Jag. I'm not sure what I'm trying to communicate here. Could it be longer hood, much longer hood? Maybe if you grabbed it on both ends and pulled lol.

 

Let me clarify. I don't need "more, more, more hp..." that's why I haven't modded the engine. The standard Xfires are nice cars; but, their competition at the time had close to 300 hp vs. it's 215. The gap was too large between the Limited and the SRT. To be competative, it needed to have more HP IMO. It was priced in the same range as the 350Z, Z3/4, and didn't offer better performance. It was criticized for lacking the HP (not by me!). As for the split window, those are left to teh concepts because they aren't practical, nor are they safe these days. I was merely stating that the concepts used those as a nod to the past. I'm not saying that it needs 500hp, but at least 300 - 330 for the standard model.

 

Agreed. The critcs of the Crossfire complained it was underpowered at 219 hp. Seldom heard a complaint about the 320 SLK with the same engine but then, it said Benz on the side.

Once again and, to be clear, I am not asking about the windscreen. I hope Eric jumps in on this 'cause you and I are not on the same frequency here. in his Xfire 1.0 concepts I see a triangle at the center bottom of the windshield. I see it again in 2.0. I am merely asking him if it is a slip of the pencil or does he have something in mind there that never makes it to production. Keep in mind that Eric Stoddard is not know for vanilla, conventional, off the shelf, styling designs.

Given the power to weight ratio of the standard Xfire it's performance is fairly competitive, even with the vehicles you offered. The stats show this when compared to cars of the same period 2003 to 2005. Market entry period of the car. Had the divorce not happened, I imagine HP would have progressed. Think of a C63 in the Xfire, hmmm?

But that is then. This is now. I would agree that 300HP in a new, slightly larger version of the Xfire would be a must. Approaching 500 HP on the SRT or High Performance version would also be a marketing must.

 

Yes, I think you're right. It came off as a grab your girlfriend and go to the beach car, where as the Z was a no nonsense performance car. The SRT6 measured up but it was so expensive that it wasn't competitive as a Z
alternative. This isn't the first car that was doomed by lack of power. I would think Chrysler Corp. would have learned their lesson when they put a V6 in the Prowler.

I hope no one here thinks I'm dissing the N/A but you must admit when it comes to relative power it was a little behind the Z. The fact that they're unique goes a long way in my book.

 

Hey Eric, Are you going to be at spring show this year??

 

Erik, how do I get a real sketch of my XF SRT from the creator?....that would be priceless to me....fan of your work....

 

For those who haven't tried one yet,

Genesis Coupe
http://www.hyundaigenesis.com/coupe/

Click on "EDIT YOUR OWN" or "GO." Spend five minutes in a Hyundai and be amazed

You go Eric


roadster with a stick

 

I'm a fan of the NA Cross, just by itself. Not dissin' the SRT at all, but like others think the NA is just fine. Lots of power that I'll need on the street-I can take care of almost anybody (thing) out there if I really want to, will take it to the track to push it as fast as it and I can handle it, and it's a solid car especially for the money paid for it. If it got totalled tomorrow I'd be looking for another one. I've NEVER said that about ANY other car I've had. If I ran into a good deal on an SRT I might buy it, but not because of the power, but because they're relatively rare among a relatively low production car. But if I found a nice NA I'd be happy with that too. This is my daily driver and I'm very happy with the one I've chosen.

 

Eric, I, and a bunch of Xfire owners, will back Mdaniels4 up on this. The NA is a kick to drive. Most of us would be unaware, from our experiences, that it is underpowered. The car doesn't seem to know it either.

I own an SRT but the NA is my daily driver. Much more overall fun in my opinion and has given a respected performance to the many who challenged it as well. They have learned to appreciate the sculpted beaty of the boat tail rear end.


franc

 

The idea was to continue the center spine from the hood into the windshield, to form a unique cowl shape that's reminiscent of the old split windshields, without the split.

 

I think Eric has left the building.

 

Gee, I was really wrong about that.

 

Eric thank you for all your hard work.

 

OK. I'm quite fine with that. It is a shame the concept did not find a use in the production model. Perhaps as a clever radio or GPS antenae or to house a unique set of washer fluid nozzles.

Keep the spine. It defines the Crossfire.

Thanks Eric.

roadster with a stick

 

I was just over a year with Chrysler when I started sketching the Crossfire, in the fall of 1999. Back then under Tom Gale, the concept cars for the following year were decided through an in-house design competition open to the entire design staff. Designers could submit anything they wanted for Chrysler, Dodge or Jeep, and they could submit as many ideas as they wanted. Concept ideas were presented in sketch form and submitted on 20"x30" boards. There were over 100 boards submitted by the entire staff. Then through a series of executive meetings, they selected 4 concept cars though elimination...a Chrysler, 2 Dodges and a Jeep. The designers whose sketches were selected were put in charge of the clay model development and show car build.

I submitted 4 different concept boards, 2 Chryslers and 2 Dodges. One of my concepts was a little boat-tailed coupe I called the "250c". Miraculously, the "250c" made it through the entire elimination process and was selected to become the Chrysler concept car for the 2001 NAIAS. Tom Gale liked it because it reminded him of a Stingray Vette. It was my manager Don "Ramcharger" Renkert who later came up with the Crossfire name. He has a talent for naming cars and has named several cars in the lineup. Glenn Abbott was put in charge of designing the interior, and Don Savitch was the lead clay modeler. Working with Savitch we built the full size clay in about 4 months and shipped it off to Metalcrafters.

After the 2001 NAIAS, Dieter Zetsche and Wolfgang Bernhard liked it so much they sarted pulling the strings necessary to get it in production by 2003 on the SLK chassis, and again I worked with Don Savitch on the production version and the roadster, this time under design manager Andrew Dyson. The rest is history!