Introduction: The Chrysler 300 and the Dodge Charger belong to the same LX platform as the Dodge Magnum does. The only difference is the Magnum was the only vehicle to stop being produced while the Charger and 300 continue to live on. Both 300 and Charger are practically the same the big difference being mostly down to badge and exterior styling. Both cars changed the full size car market in that they returned to using rear wheel drive which in turn spawned the short lived Pontiac G8 as competition. The use of rear wheel drive allowed Dodge to attempt to sell Chargers to police fleets many of which are very used to the out of production Ford Crown Victoria compared to General Motors using the front wheel drive Chevrolet Impala.
Most people who know me attempted to convince me that Chrysler hasn't totally screwed up their car lineup by using these two cars as an example. Given my first drive in the Magnum I set my expectations much lower than normal.
Performance: For this review due to the fact both cars use several engines I'll note the Charger as the 2.7L V6 and the 300 using the 3.5L V6. The scores will reflect the trim level given. Well the Charger SE uses the same 2.7L V6 I've mentioned was a huge problem for the Magnum and the Sebring...its no different this time. This is such a pathetic engine that its pretty embarrassing. Its the same 190 hp and 190 lb.ft of torque engine. The Magnum is about 100 lbs heavier, so the Charger likely does 0-100 km/h in 11 seconds, there are no real tested times...its probably too embarrassing. Keep in mind the engine sounds terrible so revving this thing is no joy. The 300 Touring has the 3.5L and this engine is far more adequate for the job but is still not great doing 0-100 km/h in roughly 9 seconds. That engine produces 250 hp and 250 lb.ft of torque. This engine is much smoother and felt a bit faster than the 9 seconds suggest. However its no Honda or Toyota so it will consume fuel at a higher rate. In cars this big and this heavy...the 2.7L is a stupid idea. Another note, I thought the brakes on both cars were pretty weak.
My Score(Charger SE): 1/10 - A horrible engine, far too slow and far too weak and sounds awful.
My Score(300 Touring): 5/10 - A nicer smoother engine, but still slow and also not that efficient.
Handling: This is where I hope the RWD comes into play alas it was not what I was expecting. Taking most RWD cars into a corner is where the fun from the layout comes out, taking the Charger or the 300 into the corners show how poorly engineered they are. Both vehicles are just too soft and the suspension is too slow to react during faster cornering. The 300 has a decent ride, the Charger doesn't seem to provide that softness. Much of the misery of the Magnum returns to my mind, they do corner better than the Magnum but that's mainly because they're both lighter. RWD seems to have prevented a poor handling car from being the worst handling car.
My Score(Charger SE): 2/10 - Very poor cornering ability, poor suspension setup
My Score(Chrysler 300): 3/10 - Same as the Charger but more comfortable
Interior: This area I was hoping for something better, as I believe it to be it seems the Ram stole all of Chrysler's interior budget so both cars suffer as a result. The Charger SE is the base vehicle and the interior is nothing but disgusting, cheap, black plastic. The 300 Touring is given leather which is actually comfortable but the major additions over the charger is the stupid analog clock. As a car supposed to be their top of the line...it uses a lot of material you expect to be too cheap for even the bottom of the line vehicle. A huge problem in these cars is the poor visibility, not only are the windows small...the C-pillar is a gigantic blind spot. The interior of both vehicles appear to be an afterthought as a result they get a very poor score. The build quality on these cars are mediocre, better than some US assembled Chryslers but not near US assembled Japanese vehicles. Both cars are built in Brampton, Ontario.
My Score(both): 2/10 - Same cheap Chrysler material found in their cheapest vehicles
Styling: Finally something good to talk about these disappointing vehicles. Both vehicles have been styled extremely well as far as the exterior is concerned. The 300 is very much like the sort of car you expect the mafia to drive, its very big and menacing but appears to have some sort of a status along with that. The Charger is more aggressive looking and looks like the sort of vehicle that is a hunter...pity its too slow to match its looks. It appears Chrysler spent some money somewhere so as a result the scores are good.
My Score(both): 9/10 - Both vehicles look very good and have no need for a restyle.
Value for money: Both these cars do have something that most full size cars in this age don't have...rear wheel drive. This does give these cars a mild advantage over the competition with the only car offering RWD is the Pontiac G8. The problem is the rest of the car leaves a lot to be desired, the V6 engines Chrysler offers don't move these cars all that quickly meaning if you want this car to be faster than say...a Mazda 3 you have to buy the Hemi V8. The interior is extremely low rent regardless of which trim level, something none of its competition suffers. If you want a car with good looks...and has RWD regardless of its awful suspension...these cars are for you then.
My Score(both): 4/10 - Neither are good value especially in lower trim form...yet high trim vehicles are expensive but still retain the cheapness of the lower trim cars. Having RWD however is a plus.
Overall(Charger SE): 18/50 - For a base vehicle at this price its terrible, high marks only for good looks.
Overall(300 Touring): 23/50 - Better than a base Charger...but not that much better
.jpg)
