Why Chrysler should revisit the Crossfire and other biased Crossfire thoughts.

1. The strongest reason that Chrysler should reintroduce the Crossfire is the "Penstar" V6 engine. In the 4,000+lbs Challenger it makes 305hp!! That's 305 American HP! A great way to get some pride back from the Germans. The SRT-6 made 330hp. Chrysler/Fiat is in development of a single and twin turbo versions in the works. 370hp and 420hp respectively. These power plants would give the Crossfire the power it should have had from the beginning to go along with its good looks.

2. The Corvette. America's Sports car. It is, it always will be. And that's ok. Thunderbird tried to compete with it and failed. So why would you? The Viper kicks it's ***, but cost more. Viper is going to drop the Dodge badge. It's now going to be the SRT Viper. And there is talk of a Hemi Viper. That is a mistake in my mind. Why? Because you don't make your Halo car SLOWER! You make it faster! So how does Ma Mopar compete with the Corvette? You box it out. You have the Viper on the top end of the Vette. So, enter the Crossfire. You'd have to keep the new SRT-6/TT (twin turbo) at $50,000. Offer a SRT-6 at $40,000ish and a Base Crossfire at $30,000ish. I think they can do this with less Mercedes-Benz parts and putting in Chrysler Penstar Engines that come in everything from Jeeps to Mini-Vans. And Chrysler Transmissions. No Mercedes-Benz parts. This would box out the Vette price wise on the showroom floor.

3. What the Crossfire needs for the update. Minor body update. Not much, but I am biased. Hey, the 911 gets away with it, why not the Crossfire? The chassis is pretty amazing. They say it's stiffer then a 911. Maybe a little more room in the wheel wells for wider tires. So we are good there. And the Penstar engine has the power we all crave covered. I would like to see a 6speed transaxle, al a Vette, for weight distribution. They MUST get rid of the steer box and put in a rack and pinion! Oh, and keep it at 3,000lbs. I would like to see stripper models. No motored and heated seat. Light weight racing seats. Roll up windows. No electric rear spoiler. Basically an ACR Crossfire. With a Traction Control cut off switch that actually completely turns it off.

So there you go. Simple, easy way for the Crossfire to make a strong come back. Now if only more people would buy them this time?

 

Very interesting indeed.

 

My take on this topic, from this thread - What If Chrysler Brought Back the Crossfire?


The existing Crossfire is a small(ish) two seater coupe or roadster, front engine, RWD, with either a naturally aspirated or forced induction V6 engine. Most of it was sourced through Mercedes Benz. We all know this, I'm not telling anyone anything new.

But MB is out of the picture now, and Fiat is in. And under the Fiat empire we also find Ferrari (not going to be any mash up there as Ferrari is sacred), Maserati (not quite sacred, but playing to a much more exclusive demographic than the Chrysler brand), Lancia (which already has some mash ups with Chrysler via the 300 and 200 being rebadged as Lancias in Europe) and Alfa Romeo. And here's where it gets fun.......... Alfa Romeo, maker of fantastic little lightweight two seater sports cars for decades. And the 4C concept looks like it's about to become a reality, and it would be the perfect platform for a new Crossfire, updating all the running gear to current thinking.

So what's an Alfa Romeo 4C, you ask?

A small, two seat sports car featuring RWD, a mid engine layout, a curb weight below 2000lbs, and a turbo charged 4 cylinder engine making 230HP but capable of 300HP or more. So the "Limited" gets the 230HP which, in a car that weighs 1,000lbs less than the current Crossfire would yield fantastic performance (think Lotus Exige) and the SRT would get the 300HP version (which would offer stunning performance in such a lightweight car). More on the 4C at the link below.

Alfa Romeo 4C - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Stay with me now.................

+fireamx linked to a old thread where some sketches by the "Creator" were shown, and I've copy/pasted that here:


OK, so take the info offered above on the 4C, and wrap it in bodywork along the lines of those sketches - which already have intakes along the flanks that are perfect for feeding a mid engine layout - and you've got the next Crossfire. And it's all workable - it's a new/current Fiat owned platform, and replicating it under the Chrysler badge would be relatively inexpensive since the bulk of the engineering work is done, and it would amortize the investment over a broader sales spectrum since you'd have the Alfa version in Europe and elsewhere and the Chrysler in North America. The turbo engines fit perfectly into the current thinking of smaller displacement engines using forced induction to meet performance expectations of the buyers and fuel economy demands of the government. BMW, MB, Audi and everyone else is doing it for the same reasons, as is Fiat in other applications.



And that, my friends, is what the next generation Crossfire would be.
Could be.
Should be.


But, sadly, I doubt it ever will be.

 

Mike, great read. A lot of cool ideas. Although your idea, and my idea are in the same vein. I think a mid-engined tiny sports car is even more impractical then what the Crossfire is. At least we have a usable hatch. I love the idea of a mid-engined Mopar!!! It's just not a Crossfire. Have you seen pictures of Fourth Gen '75 Barracuda that never came out? They could take that look and make it smaller for your concept car. As long as they could shoe horn a Hemi in that little platform. I don't think the purists would mind a 'Cuda comeback? Offer a base 4cyl, a Penastar 6 and an SRT Hemi version. A limited run mid-engine Hemi would RULE! Don't say it can't be done. Pontiac Feiro's have V8 bolt in kits!!! And as long as you can get the "New 'Cuda" with a Hemi option, you can remind the old guard that all the old Cuda's could be bought with a slant-6!!!

What do you think????

 

You're missing one big thing though. Most people who own a Crossfire are ashamed of the Chrysler badging. Most are removing that badge and putting Mercedes badges in it's place. Plus it's the Mercedes parts in this car that make it such a great car.

 

I really don't think it's even close to "most". I think it's actually a very few, and I also think it's a terrible idea and it makes the owners look like poseurs to others. Sorry, it's the way I feel about it. If you're that easily impressed by a brand name, I think you've got some issues.

There. I've finally said it. I've been wanting to say that for years but never did.

I feel a bit better now.

 

+1. I have my XF since Dec. '11, I have since removed the rebadged emblems. I love the car for what it is!

 

With as many people as I've personally seen explain that their car really isn't a chrysler and that it's a mercedes I'd have to disagree with you.

 

13Dog,
You'd have to wonder why someone would buy a Chrysler Crossfire, then be embarrassed that it's a Chrysler and go to all the trouble to rebadge it a Mercedes?!?! It says one of two things;

1. I really wanted a Mercedes but I could only afford an out dated one reskined as a Chrysler. Now, I'm going to buy Mercedes badges and put them on to prove to people I in fact CAN afford a Mercedes.

2. I bought a Crossfire because it look cooler then any Mercedes. And Chrysler took an aging platform that Mercedes discarded. Stiffened up the chassis, tuned the old suspension so it can handle with cars way out of its price range. And I want all the shallow people to think I drive a Mercedes.

Personally, I bought a used Crossfire for three reasons. Handling, looks and the price was right. Price, Handling and looks is ALL Chrysler. No rack and pinion, low on power, no manual for the SRT and the ever intrusive traction control is all Mercedes.

And that leads me to the next question? Are we going to get a whole different type of owner if Fiat helps build another Crossfire? Will they buy it for the Italian Engineering?

Look, I brag about it's Mercedes heritage also. But when I have to explain the reciprocating ball steer box, or why it has only 215hp. Trust me, I'm not defending Chrysler. And when I explain how the chassis is stiffer then a 911, and take compliments on its cool styling, that's all Mopar.

 

"Ashamed" is a strong word.

Mercedes gifted Chrysler with an easy platform to build on. It's no shocker that Mercedes is a lofty brand with a lot of respect in the market. So naturally, telling someone it's based heavily on a Mercedes pays the car quite a compliment. It's like saying you have sole custody of a child birthed by Scarlett Johansson. It's a heritage that I'm quite proud of. It certainly gives the Crossfire many strengths (reliability, sound build-structure, great suspension). It also provides a great deal of weaknesses (reliability, archaic steering, expensive parts, tricky repairs, no aftermarket).

Chrysler was once upon a time a VERY sought-after US-brand. The last decade hasn't helped that image.

I've covered the center portion of the front and rear Chrysler wings with the label I designed and Andrew produced. The wing -- which is unmistakably Chrysler -- remains. Even Steve agrees it's a great look... it hearkens back to the car's heritage while NOT posing as an AMG. My chief purpose in covering the center emblem was the removal of the "gold" from the exterior of the car. Gold badges haven't been cool since foreigners adorned their beige Lexus sedans with gold lettering. It looks tacky IMO. The newest Chrysler emblem is gorgeous and I would love to find a way to put that on my car.

Chrysler and Karmann took a hairdresser's car and turned it into a car that would set your hair on fire with the thrilling drive it offers. They made the R170 chassis corner better and look better. The styling (all Chrysler) is the very thing that causes people to waltz right past the SLK at a car show. It simply looks less dated, less feminine than the R170 (some would even argue the non-AMG R171).

When the hood is popped -- Mercedes (in my case, AMG) gets all the credit. Chrysler did absolutely nothing to the components under the hood other than hide the AMG logos as best as they could, which they did a ****-poor job.

In 2005, Chrysler's motor would have been a grave injustice given the availability of overstocked Benz mills. In 2012, the decision would be a bit harder, as Chrysler is coming out swinging with its newer motors.

I absolutely love the fact that my car is a mutt. It keeps people guessing, and I don't have to pay MORE (Mercedes tax) to drive an older car with poorer handling.

 

I counter the well written if not lengthy... hot air of a post with fat emo. Maybe tomorrow I'll feel like reading all of it.

 

 

toddler house?

 

 

I see your Chris and raise you a "Peta" Bear

 

Don't you mean "pedo"?

PETA = squirrel huggers & panda petters

 

I'm just quoting Steve

 

Steve said it was a "panda" bear sticker.... SMH

 

 

Jenson Interceptors had big Chrysler wedge 383 or 440's.
Some TVRs enjoyed Ford V8's, or Triumph inline 6's.
Lotus uses a Toyota ZZ engine.
Panteras came with Ford Cleveland V8's.
DeTomaso Mangustas had small block Fords,
As did the Sunbeam Tiger.
Even TR8's came with an aluminum Buick "Nail Head" V8. Licensed to British Leyland.
13, do you think any of the owners of these cars kept their cars drivetrains a secret? I mean why would they?
I just don't understand the reasoning that when somebody simply states a "fact" about their cars ancestory, it automatically means they're ashamed of the Parent company whose name is on it.
Of course 44 years later some people still think the AMX came with a 390 "Ford" in it.