Battle of the 'Hundreds'

[xellow]

Battle of the 'Hundreds' points up different design attitudes


By John McCormick / Autos Insider


Two of Detroit's automakers are gearing up for an interesting clash of design philosophies in the heart of the car market. In one corner of the ring we already have Chrysler Group, presenting its 300 sedan, Dodge Magnum sport wagon and Pacifica crossover vehicle. Soon to step into the other corner from Ford Motor Co. are the closely related Five Hundred and Mercury Montego sedans and the Freestyle sport wagon.

Though some observers, myself included, find the 300's front end design overly brash, the car has struck a chord with American sedan buyers and is flying out of showrooms, with sales topping 12,000 cars a month. Today, Chrysler leaders who pushed through such a bold design are looking like heroes, even if long term it remains to be seen if the car will have legs, or whether the market will tire of its visual appeal.

At Ford several top executives earlier this year were predicting that the 300 was too far out there for the "conservative" tastes of the middle American public. The correct answer, they argued, are the Five Hundred/Freestyle/Montego trio.

Compared to the 300 - variously described as a baby Bentley or gangster staff car, the Five Hundred is as sober as a judge. That is exactly what the people want, Ford chief designer, J Mays, told me eight months ago.

If the Five Hundred looks straight-laced, then the Freestyle - dubbed 'Stylefree' by one of my peers - is as prim and proper as a Sunday school teacher. And seen in the company of the Pacifica, or the Dodge Magnum for that matter, the Ford blends swiftly into the background.

By contrast, the Pacifica's styling - fresh and distinctive, without the 300's outright brazenness - is the car's strong point. The Chrysler crossover also boasts a finely crafted instrument panel, but thereafter its interior packaging falls well short of that in the Freestyle, which is much more functional and sensibly laid out.

In the Pacifica's case, market experience showed that design alone was not enough to ensure a successful launch. After its introduction last year the vehicle floundered, partly because of high pricing - a mistake clearly not made with the competitively stickered 300. Recently, Pacifica sales, encouraged by generous incentives, have picked up. As for the Magnum, it will be fascinating to see if its daring styling resonates as well with buyers as has the look of the 300.

Meanwhile Ford will see how deep America's conservatism runs with its new trio. In terms of pricing Ford will echo Chrysler's aggressive strategy with 300, but go further still. Exact prices will be announced this week, but expect the 500 and Freestyle to start in the mid-$20,000 range, and cost substantially less than comparable Chrysler models. Such competitive values, coupled with the sheer strength of Ford's dealer network, should ensure Ford makes its mark with its newcomers. But in a tacit acknowledgement that the designs are too tame, freshened, more exciting versions are due to follow within two years.

Though a reporting embargo prevents me from going into the details, this positive influence on vehicle dynamic progress is evident to some extent from my first drives of the Five Hundred, Montego and Freestyle. These Fords may be a tad frumpy to look at but they should not be disappointing at the wheel. The ones that follow should be better still.

Article Here

[mbukukanyau]

Originally posted by xellow@Aug 9 2004, 07:39 PM

300 C will be like all Chrysler products, or, when those who want it buy it, Sales die. Just like PT Cruiser or H2.

Meanwhile bland sedans, (Camry Malibu, Accord) etc go on selling. poor ford needs to up socks on Quality. Then people can buy its sedans

[jaorobot]

the 300 is beautiful... but like any beautiful chrysler car that looks new and stylish, its gets very ugly with each passing year as you see more and more of them and they age very quickly..

the new cadillacs were stylish and beautiful at first, but they've handled incorporating some blandness and conservatism into its styling and it wont age like the 300C will, IMO.

the cobalt is way tooooo bland..

I think the ford 500 is actually beautiful in its simplicity... if they dropped a large, fast V8 in there, i would rather have that any day than a 300c.

[ByTheLake]

Originally posted by mbukukanyau@Aug 9 2004, 05:29 PM
300 C will be like all Chrysler products, or, when those who want it buy it, Sales die. Just like PT Cruiser or H2.

Sales die, just like PT Cruiser? GM could use a few 'dead' cars with PT Cruiser's volume.

Through July, DCX sold 71,451 Cruisers ... AHEAD of last year's pace of 70,884. DCX will sell over 100,000 PT Cruisers this year, as it did the year before. That is an excellent sustained sales rate by any measure. In fact, DCX has sold nearly as many PT Cruisers in 2004 as Lincoln has sold both CARS and TRUCKS (79,739 combined).

PT Cruiser can only be called a success story. It exploded onto the scene and settled in with regular volumes over 100k units annually.

[Darc Requiem]

Can you guys stop saying bland....why hot plain or nondescript? My last name is Bland and well frankly I'm annoyed <_< Anyway I don't think the Cobalt is that plain at all. I think it looks great...well the coupe that is. Particularly the SS model. The sedan is looks like an ugly Jetta....and I don't think the Jetta looks to hot to begin with.

Darc Requiem

[Buick61]

I saw the 500 at the autoshow. It looks well finished. The style is definitely dated and derivative, but there are worse designs to copy than the 1998 Passat. But the interior is well executed, the trunk is immense, there's more room in the back than one would think, and it has AWD available. All in all, it should be a competitive car.

While I prefer the 300/300C, the potential success of the new Ford's shouldn't be discounted on account of a less than distinguished design and a slightly anemic engine. I'm going to reserve final judgement until the cars are properly tested by the auto mags and/or I've driven them.

[diablo4]

The freestyle's back end looks like the SRX's.

[ibechip]

Originally posted by mbukukanyau+Aug 9 2004, 09:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mbukukanyau @ Aug 9 2004, 09:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-xellow@Aug 9 2004, 07:39 PM

300 C will be like all Chrysler products, or, when those who want it buy it, Sales die. Just like PT Cruiser or H2.

Meanwhile bland sedans, (Camry Malibu, Accord) etc go on selling. poor ford needs to up socks on Quality. Then people can buy its sedans [/b][/quote]
Not only have PT Cruiser sales just exploded right away and have even managed to sustain them (helped by the new convertable), but the H2 sales are also climbing. I'm sure the SUT version has also helped that but at least they have kept the lineup fresh by offering variations. It will be interesting to see if Chrysler can do the same.

[FoMoCo Fan]

I think the 300 is here to stay. A wise move would be for them to come out with coupe and convertible versions in a year or so. The chops that were posted on the autoweek BBS looked even better than the sedan, the proportions worked much better.

That said, the 300 and the Five Hundred are going after two different types of customers, just like the Avalon and the 300C aren't likey to be cross shopped too much.

[Redneck]

Originally posted by FoMoCo Fan@Aug 10 2004, 04:53 AM
That said, the 300 and the Five Hundred are going after two different types of customers, just like the Avalon and the 300C aren't likey to be cross shopped too much.

My thoughts as well. Why are 2 different Class cars being matched? 300C's go against the worn out Crown vic with its RWD V8. 500 Should go against the Impala and whatever Dodge has.

I like the 300C, but its garnered more bling bling attention than i like. And the more I look at the 500, the more i like it. Suitable replacement for the Taraus...

[pontiac is for me]

::RANT mode on::

I remember 20-25 years ago (late 1970's, early 1980's) when we were kids we would dream about what cars would be like in 20 years . . . what cars would be like in the year 2000 and beyond. Boy, were WE wrong! I think that if auto styling had consistenly evolved from the 1980's, the average family sedan in 2005 would look more like the Buick Cielo or Buick LaCrosse CONCEPT, not the Buick LaCrosse production model. But the retro trend put an end to that . . . thanks to nostalgic Baby Boomers, I suspect; not that there is anything wrong with that.

It's market driven . . . the vast majority of car buyers do not want to look like Tom Cruise driving that futuristic Lexus in Minority Report. I think it is a lot like neckties, believe it or not. The neckties men wore 70, 80, even 90 years ago (early 20th century) are pretty much the same as the neckties we wear now, and we are just fine with that. Today the necktie has more advanced materials and minor variations in style, but it is pretty much the same style of clothing.

I fear that for the rest of our lives, the market will dicate that automobile styling doesn't change much. God willing, 50 years from now I will be riding in a brand new, hydrogen-powered 2054 Buick sedan piloted by a computer that looks like a 1998 Buick Century mildly refreshed. Too bad . . . I really wanted a bubble-top "George Jetson" Special.

::RANT mode off::

[barcodedorganic]

the 300 is a midsized car...not a full sized car...so the 500 and 300 will be directly compared the 500 is being criticized for being to conservative...in short fords following thre trends and that'sa good thing it shows tey're not clueless aboutthe industry...where chrysler differentiates is they've established a connection with the public they've said we're no longer making japanese themed cars that's what has been part of the problem with detroit they've tried to play japans game and failed at it those of you who say the 300 is another fad car will be surprised when the sales level off at high volumes of sales and NOT to rental companies and taxi fleets i see that as the main reason for success for the 500 the market dodge and chrysler left behind with the intrepids and the concorde and LHS in fleet sales along with a few private sales...

the 500's not a horrible car....but neither is it terribly ground breaking or innovative

[doh]

the car has struck a chord with American sedan buyers and is flying out of showrooms, with sales topping 12,000 cars a month.

I don't really call this flying, with today's standards maybe but FLYING was the original Mustang at 22000 cars in it's first day! thats right DAY, 418000 cars in it's first year. These are numbers, but of course cars and manufacturers are far more competitive today and all have been scrambling for another car like it. One that appeals to both the emotional and the practical buyer.

The 300C has a large appeal to the emotional buyer, who can answer yes to the question "does that thing gota Hemi?" The thing about that is what happens if say Ford does come out with thier 427 concept? V10 RWD 500+hp?

The Five Hundered is more a practical buyers car, Large, good value AWD avalible, safe etc. This may never sell with the gusto of some but also will not fade in the background as some.

Two different cars two different buyers. The real trick is find one car for both drivers.

[Broman]

The thing that I always find strange is that the executive brass always claims to know what John Q Public wants. Just like the aforementioned Ford exec claiming that the customers don't want a brash, flashy car like the 300, what they really want is a dreadfully dull, already outdated looking car like the one they are releasing.......pppffftttt

Yea that's why the 300 is flying out of showrooms everywhere. Hell they just came out and there are dozens of them in my home town - which is only a modest 30,000 people. And they are probably parking their new 300's next to their wives' PT Cruisers - Chrysler's other "flop"......

And that whole "HEMI" thing is just a passing phase too, just like the SBC! (please read with a large serving of sarcasm).

This seems to be the root of a lot of the problems with American car companies. They think they know more about what you want than you do. They should actually ask John Q for a change, that'd be novel.

And as for the retro styling boom. It's not just baby boomers who desire it - boomers had children - those children either got the boomers hand-me-downs or they had grown up riding in their parents old cars. They probably have pictures of themselves (as children) in old cars, and boomers are always waxing nostalgic about the good old days when cars were build like brick out-houses......Things like this add up to YOUNG folks who like retro styling just as much as the grey-beards. I should know - I am one of those "youth's" (a son of boomers), and this is my story. I doubt it is a unique one.

Bring on the PT's, Prowlers, Vipers, Camaros, Trans Ams, SSRs, Impalas, GTOs, Mustangs, Ford GTs, and anything else you can dream up. I want one of each....

As much as you want to call it a fad or a phase it isn't going anywhere soon. Someone used the analogy of a tie - I'll use a bikini, it hasn't changed much, and that's fine by me!!! I mean we might keep dipping back into our proverbial gene-pool for designs, but there is good reason for it - the market was heading in a really boring direction in the 70's, most of the 80's and even some of the 90's. I for one am glad that we going back in time for designs. Older cars had sexy designs. They weren't just jelly-beans on wheels. They weren't so slab-sided and uninspired. They were shapely and swoopy (attractive even ).

In fact I am of the mind-set that if the "big three" don't come up with something retro-cool or something with some kind of spirit I'll just build my own. Why buy a 30k new car that you don't really like when you can buy an old car for 2k (or so), sink 10-20k into it and end up with a car that IS cool and HAS spirit? Go ahead and tell me that this thinking is unrealistic - I've already done it.... I sold my Camaro(after it was paid for) and my dirtbikes - then used the money to by a '50 Buick which I then rebuilt and am driving the wheels off of. I should add that I am not alone. Five guys - all my age - in my town have done this very same thing. And I am a member of many message boards of like minded people so it's not a locallized phenomenon.

The largest problem I see with the retro styled cars (minus the PT, the 300 and Mustang) is that they always seem to be waaaay over priced. They get treated like they were built for special markets when the reality is that the pricing MAKES them a specialty market car. The SSR being the biggest dissappointment.

I saw the SSR in all of the auto mags and thought I'd buy one the day they were released, that is until I saw the price. Ouch, almost twice what I would have paid for a truck that I basically useless as a truck. I could buy two S-10's, drive one of them until it drops then crack the seal on the other (in 5-10 years from now). OR I could buy one S-10, take it to my garage, spend 15k on mods and kick the SSR right in the crotch. Then again I guess I am a DIYer and not afraid of a wrench.

But it just seems that if they were priced better they'd sell like ice in Africa. If the GTO were about 25k (the SSR - too), I think that they would be selling them. I don't know about your areas, but around here the same SSR has been sitting there for months now, and the GTO never sold locally, they had to send it off to a bigger market. There is only one SSR in town and I have never seen a GTO on the road - in person that is. And the Prowler needed to come down to reallity - who is going to buy a PT Cruiser coupe for what was it 50k+? Yea right. If it went for a realistic price it would still be around.


Retro styling may go away someday, but you have to look back before you can go forward.......

[paul8488]

that was a good read man!

i think i'd take an SSR over any other current GM vehicle. XLR is fine, vette is great, CTS-V has balls... but for my weekend romp it'll take a red SSR, thanks. GM can throw a damn fine vehicle together... i don't give a flying f*%# what "design philosophy" it follows (retro? cab forward? crossover?). a hot car by any other name... but the visual appeal of the SSR won't reach near enough people at $70,000 (CAD).

you're dead on: "the pricing MAKES them a specialty market car". the trick folding top and hydroformed body panels command a few more bucks, but the SSR deserves to flounder at the price of a small home in the nearby working-mans town of hamilton.

i don't think ford is too far off with the 500. they wanna sell a whole lotta cars, and are certainly willing to ignore a few traditionalists to grab a bunch more jonny cubicles. that's a decent business case. it's the fringe cars that should get the fringe consumers. though in the case of the 300 chrysler's proving that fringe population is pretty damn big!