$2.99 gas and diesel?

[bugo]

quote:Originally posted by custosnox

Now don't go trashing crysler.  They came out with some good cars.  I'll even name a few for you.  1............ ummmm... 1............ ummmm... oh come on, someone help me out here

I saw an orange 1971 Plymouth GTX at 41st and Peoria today.  I think it snarled at me when my eyes popped out when I saw it.  Now THAT was a good car.

[bugo]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote:Originally posted by custosnox

Now don't go trashing crysler.  They came out with some good cars.  I'll even name a few for you.  1............ ummmm... 1............ ummmm... oh come on, someone help me out here

the Eagle Talon TSi was a good car, but that was actually a Mitsubishi Eclipse.

I test drove a couple of 1992 Talons back when they were knew.  Incredibly quick cars.  They'll get away from you in a hurry.  Was yours FWD or AWD?  I drove both, and while the AWD was obviously the superior car, I think the FWD might have been more fun because of the tremendous torque steer that you had to fight to keep them going.  I'm surprised more of them didn't end up smashing into ditches.

Was yours auto or manual?  I drove a 91 Eclipse GSX auto and I was disappointed.  The 5 speed is the only way to go.

And while the Talon was a badge-engineered version of the Mitsubishi Eclipse (and the seldom-seen Plymouth Laser) Chrysler did have some hand in its design.

Fun, fun cars.  I want a 92-94 Laser AWD with a 5 speed.  What year was yours?

[waterboy]

Bugo, that orange GTX you saw reminded me of the only true muscle car that ever scared the bejeezus out of me. My brother's dark green 1968 440 GTX with three speed torqueflight. You could depress the brake pedal and slightly hit the accelerator and it would wiggle and snarl like a leopard sizing up its prey. It would then launch itself with so much torque that your tummy would hurt. People remember the RoadRunners, but the GTX was class and only the 428 hemi could outrun it and even so just at the top end speeds.

[bugo]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Bugo, that orange GTX you saw reminded me of the only true muscle car that ever scared the bejeezus out of me. My brother's dark green 1968 440 GTX with three speed torqueflight. You could depress the brake pedal and slightly hit the accelerator and it would wiggle and snarl like a leopard sizing up its prey. It would then launch itself with so much torque that your tummy would hurt. People remember the RoadRunners, but the GTX was class and only the 428 hemi could outrun it and even so just at the top end speeds.

The GTX was a luxury muscle car and came standard with the 440 big block V8 engine with 375 horspower from 1967 to 1970, 370 in 1971.  The Road Runner was a stripped down budget muscle car and came standard with a 335 HP 383 (300 HP in 71.)  After 1971, the Road Runner was available with small block engines.  Both the 68-71 Road Runner and GTX were also available with the infamous 426 Hemi (it was a 426, the 428 was built by Ford (Cobra Jet.)  Pontiac also made a 428 in the late Sixties to power its large Bonnevilles and other full sized cars.  Starting in late 69, the 440 with 3 2 barrel carbs (440 Six Pack on Dodges) was available on Road Runners.

And from what I've read, the 440 was virtually as quick as the Hemi on the streets, partially because of the poor quality bias ply tires available at the time.  And it was much simpler than the complex 426, which made it a much better engine for street use.

[bmuscotty]

quote: Now don't go trashing crysler. They came out with some good cars. I'll even name a few for you. 1............ ummmm... 1............ ummmm... oh come on, someone help me out here

I drive a 2004 Dodge Neon SXT (also built by Mitsubishi) that I just love. Been a good car so far.

[OUGrad05]

Chrysler is trying anything to sell their vehicles because they make inferior products.  This is a feeble attempt to sell cars and anyone who buys a vehicle for 2.99 gas is an idiot.

[RecycleMichael]

The Chrysler Aspen is rated at 13 Mpg.
http://www.chrysler.com/en/performance/2008/

Other Chrysler models are 15, 16 or 17 mpg.

12,000 miles at 13 mph is 923 gallons of gas. Today gas is 3.59 so the difference is sixty cents. 923 gallons at sixty cents is $554 or $46 a month.

This is a three year deal. What if gas is $4 or $5? At $5, this deal is worth 6 or 7 thousand dollars. That would make the deal worth it to me.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by OUGrad05

Chrysler is trying anything to sell their vehicles because they make inferior products.  This is a feeble attempt to sell cars and anyone who buys a vehicle for 2.99 gas is an idiot.

I doubt they expect to sell many cars only because of the $2.99 gas offer, but if you're on the fence between a Chrysler product and a competitor's product and have little or no other basis for making a decision between the two, why not go with the Chrysler?

(Not that I participate in the new car racket, but I still understand their reasoning)

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

if you are stupid enough to buy a chrysler product in the first place then this kind of ploy is right up your alley.

At least it's not Ford.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by inteller

if you are stupid enough to buy a chrysler product in the first place then this kind of ploy is right up your alley.

At least it's not Ford.

Agreed.  I drive a 2008 Dodge Avenger SXT.  Good car, sofar.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

The Chrysler Aspen is rated at 13 Mpg.
http://www.chrysler.com/en/performance/2008/

Other Chrysler models are 15, 16 or 17 mpg.

12,000 miles at 13 mph is 923 gallons of gas. Today gas is 3.59 so the difference is sixty cents. 923 gallons at sixty cents is $554 or $46 a month.

This is a three year deal. What if gas is $4 or $5? At $5, this deal is worth 6 or 7 thousand dollars. That would make the deal worth it to me.

It's a clever promotion, I'd be willing to bet it stimulates sales with those who haven't had a recent sub-prime foreclosure. [B)]

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by bugo

quote:Originally posted by custosnox

Now don't go trashing crysler.  They came out with some good cars.  I'll even name a few for you.  1............ ummmm... 1............ ummmm... oh come on, someone help me out here

I saw an orange 1971 Plymouth GTX at 41st and Peoria today.  I think it snarled at me when my eyes popped out when I saw it.  Now THAT was a good car.

Chrysler use-to have a real good engine back then called the 225 slant six they say it could run & run for tons of miles, however It did have a flaw in that sometimes the #5 cylinder rod would crash thru the block. They also say Fords 300 Straight six is a good engine, but I had one of those and I had alot of trouble with mine on a old 1981 pick-up truck, everything from vacuum leaks at the intake gasket to worn cam shaft lobes and low cylinger compression and oil leaks.

[sauerkraut]

The high fuel prices will likely affect diesel sales, which is bad because the diesel engine is far better than gasoline engines, but with gasoline at $4.00 a gallon and diesel about to hit $5.00 a gallon and it looks like diesel pump prices may stay in the $5.00 zone for a while a diesel vehicle will be expensive to drive. I always wanted to have a diesel pick-up truck, but now I'm happy now I bought a gasoline truck instead.[)]

[dggriffi]

quote:
E85, of course, is actual ethanol fuel, which "Flex fuel" cars can use.  It has 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline.  Odd that it still requires 15% gasoline to function, if ethanol is supposedly such a good source of energy isn't it?

And if you think E10 gets bad performance, it is nothing compared to E85.

E85 is for "flex-fuel"  vehicles,  which have always ran poorly on ethanol.  Its just an intermediate step between gasoline and ethanol.

All ethanol vehicles get better performance and millage than all gasoline engines.

[dggriffi]

quote:
I doubt they expect to sell many cars only because of the $2.99 gas offer, but if you're on the fence between a Chrysler product and a competitor's product and have little or no other basis for making a decision between the two, why not go with the Chrysler?

yeah,  they are after the low hanging fruit.  Im a Toyota fan and it will a long time before i ever buy a Chrysler again.